The Court of International Trade on Jan. 25 said importer Fraserview Remanufacturing Inc. didn't need a protest to file suit at the trade court for its entries that were erroneously deemed liquidated while liquidation was suspended. Judge Timothy Reif said that because the statute for deemed liquidation requires the that entries not be suspended, CBP's notices of deemed liquidation didn't operate to actually liquidate the entries.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Jan. 25 on AD/CVD proceedings:
Seven metal bed frame models with wood panels and slats that were imported by Zinus are not subject to antidumping duties on wooden bedroom furniture from China, the Commerce Department said in a Jan. 11 scope ruling. The AD order does not cover the furniture because it is not “made substantially of wood.”
The following trade-related lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
A German forged steel fluid end block exporter Jan. 22 for the most part supported the U.S. position in a remand redetermination that the Commerce Department couldn't make PMS adjustments for costs of production in antidumping and countervailing duty investigations. It argued, however, that the department failed to address illegitimate PMS adjustments for two inputs for comparisons based on constructed value (Ellwood City Forge Co. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 21-00077).
The U.S. defended its use of Malaysian Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 4402.90.1000 to value antidumping duty respondents' carbonized material over basket category 4402.90, telling the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit it permissibly selected the more specific heading as part of an AD review on activated carbon from China (Carbon Activated Tianjin Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2135).
The Commerce Department on Jan. 24 dropped exporter Hyundai Steel Co.'s countervailing duty rate to a de minimis mark on remand in a suit contesting the rate applicable to Hyundai's usage rights for the North Incheon Harbor in South Korea. The agency said at the Court of International Trade that it considered the exporter's "construction costs in the benefit calculation," though it disagreed that the construction costs should be considered at all (Hyundai Steel Co. v. United States, CIT # 21-00304).
CBP, on remand at the Court of International Trade, reversed its finding that importers Norca Industries Co. and International Piping & Procurment Group's imported carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings evaded the antidumping duty order on the pipe fittings from China (Norca Industrial v. United States, CIT # 21-00192).
The U.S. said Jan. 24 at the Court of International Trade that it was seeking more than $193 million in unpaid antidumping duties from German company Koehler Oberkirch, formerly known as Papierfabrik August Koehler (U.S. v. Koehler Oberkirch GmbH, CIT # 24-00014).
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Jan. 24 on AD/CVD proceedings: