The Court of International Trade in an Aug. 22 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's decision on remand to find that hardwood plywood made by the Vietnam Finewood Co. using two-ply panels imported into Vietnam from China is outside the scope of antidumping and countervailing duty orders on hardwood plywood from China. Judge Mark Barnett said that the scope decision complies with his previous order instructing Commerce to issue a scope ruling in line with the "unambiguous terms" of the orders' scope.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Aug. 21 on AD/CVD proceedings:
Importers American Pacific Plywood, U.S. Global Forest and InterGlobal Forest will appeal a June opinion by the Court of International Trade, which ruled that CBP did not misapply the substantial evidence standard when it found the three importers evaded the antidumping and countervailing duties on hardwood plywood products from China, according to an Aug. 18 filing (American Pacific Plywood v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 20-03914). In his June opinion, Judge M. Miller Baker found that the importers didn't support their theory that CBP didn't comply with the objective "reasonable mind" standard. Baker said that the importers' lack of access to all the confidential information in the suit does not constitute a due process violation (see 2306300033).
Importer Skyview Cabinet USA will appeal a June ruling by the Court of International Trade that it evaded antidumping and countervailing duty orders on wooden cabinets and vanities from China to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, according to an Aug. 18 filing (Skyview Cabinet USA v. U.S., CIT # 22-00080). In June, CIT upheld the results of an Enforce and Protect Act investigation of Skyview that found the company had evaded AD by claiming the goods were made by Malaysia-based manufacturer Rowenda Kitchen (See 2109300059). In his June opinion, Judge Stephen Vaden said CBP had correctly found that inconsistencies in submissions were enough for Commerce to find Skyview's submission non-credible and that the record backed the evasion finding (see 2306200059).
The Court of International Trade upheld July remand results from the Commerce Department that saw the weighted-average dumping margin for antidumping duty respondent Suzano drop from 32.31% to 8.63%. The remand was the second in a case challenging the third administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain uncoated paper from Brazil (Suzano S.A. v. U.S., CIT # 21-00069).
The Court of International Trade denied a government motion for judgment and ruled in favor of the defendant, American Home Assurance Company (AHAC), in a case centered on when the six-year statute of limitations begins for customs bonds, according to an Aug. 18 judgment. Though the opinion is still confidential, the judgment shows that CIT Judge Richard Eaton denied the government's motion for summary judgment and granted AHAC's motion, thereby ending the action. All claims asserted were dismissed with prejudice and Eaton ordered that each party would bear its own costs and expenses (U.S. v. American Home Assurance Co., CIT # 20-00175).
The Court of International Trade in an Aug. 21 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's remand results in the 2018 review of the countervailing duty order on hot-rolled steel flat products from South Korea. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves ruled that Commerce legally found the provision of port usage rights at the Port of Incheon to respondent Hyundai Steel Co. to be a countervailable benefit and found the reduction for sewerage fees program was not countervailable.
Antidumping and countervailing duties on solar cells and modules from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam are now set to take effect in June 2024, after the Commerce Department continued to find in final determinations announced Aug. 18 that imports from the four Southeast Asian countries are circumventing AD/CVD on solar cells from China (A-570-979/C-570-980).
The Court of International Trade in an Aug. 21 opinion sent back the Commerce Department's decision on remand to stick by its finding that questionnaires issued in lieu of on-site verification in an antidumping investigation on forged steel fittings from India satisfied the statute's verification requirement. Judge Stephen Vaden said the agency failed to consider the interests of petitioners in relying on Commerce's consistent past practice along with possible alternatives. The judge said the agency must explain what other steps closer to an on-site verification it has considered now and in 2020 and why those were rejected.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Aug. 18 on AD/CVD proceedings: