The Court of International Trade should not grant improper Diamond Tools Technology's application for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act since the government's position in an Enforce and Protect Act investigation was "substantially justified" and the case presented a "matter of first impression and a novel issue," the U.S. argued in a Nov. 27 reply brief (Diamond Tools Technology v. United States, CIT # 20-00060).
The World Trade Organization's Dispute Settlement Body on Nov. 27 agreed to Indonesia's request to set up a dispute panel to review the EU's countervailing duties on biodiesel from Indonesia, the WTO announced. The EU said it believes its duties "are fully justified, adding that it is confident its measures will be declared in line with WTO law," the WTO said. The U.S., the U.K., Norway, Russia, Thailand, Singapore, Japan, China, Canada, Argentina and Turkey reserved their third party rights to take part in the panel proceedings.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Nov. 28 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. on Nov. 27 filed a partial motion to remand regarding the Commerce Department's duty drawback adjustment in exporter Assan Aluminyum Sanayi ve Ticaret's case concerning the antidumping duty investigation on aluminum foil from Turkey. The government said it wants another chance to consider or further explain the "ratio used for the duty drawback adjustment" in the case after considering Assan's arguments. Assan consented to the request, while the petitioners, led by the Aluminum Association Trade Enforcement Working Group, said it takes no position on the motion without having looked at a copy of the motion (Assan Aluminyum Sanayi ve Ticaret v. United States, CIT # 21-00616).
The Commerce Department properly hit exporter Kumar Industries with a 13.61% adverse facts available dumping rate due to the respondent's "inadequate explanations" regarding one of its partners' ownership interest in two unnamed companies, companies A and B, the Court of International Trade ruled in a Nov. 22 opinion. Judge Timothy Stanceu sustained the rate as part of the first antidumping duty review on glycine from India, finding that Kumar "raised more questions than it answered" in its submissions, preventing Commerce from conducting a proper affiliate analysis.
The current scope of ongoing antidumping and countervailing duty investigations on aluminum extrusions from 15 countries would impose heavy costs on U.S. manufacturers and consumers, and as written would make it nearly impossible for CBP to administer and importers to comply, said a bevy of large multinational corporations and trade associations in comments filed recently filed with the Commerce Department.
The Court of International Trade in a Nov. 27 opinion sustained the Commerce Department's finding that ship building company Nur Gemicilik ve Tic, an affiliate of countervailing duty respondent Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret, is not Kaptan's cross-owned input supplier. Judge Gary Katzmann upheld Commerce's finding that Nur's steel scrap was not necessarily primarily dedicated to Kaptan's rebar production, and its consideration of Nur's business activities as part of this analysis.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Nov. 27 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit "unequivocally held" that the Commerce Department could deduct Section 232 national security duties from U.S. price in antidumping duty cases, the U.S. argued in a Nov. 17 supplemental brief at the Court of International Trade.