DOJ defended the Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available on exporter Grupo Simec in an antidumping duty review due to Simec's failure to timely submit all of the information requested. In a June 26 reply brief at the Court of International Trade, DOJ said that even though it granted several extensions to Simec so the company could file its initial and supplemental questionnaires, the exporter failed to timely submit the information in the 2019-20 administrative review of the AD order on steel concrete reinforcing bar from Mexico (Grupo Simec v. United States, CIT Consol. # 22-00202).
Tomato exporter Bioparques de Occidente failed to address many of its claims before the Commerce Department in a case on the agency's decision to resume an antidumping duty investigation after the termination of a suspension agreement, the government said in a reply brief. Issuing the brief after the trade court said Bioparques has the jurisdiction to challenge the decision, the U.S. addressed the remainder of the exporter's eight claims, arguing that Commerce's continuation of the investigation was "properly conducted" (Bioparques de Occidente v. United States, CIT # 19-00204).
Petitioner Says Commerce Rightly Excluded Door Thresholds as Ineligible for Finished Merch Exclusion
The Court of International Trade should not have found that importer Worldwide Door Components' and Columbia Aluminum Products' door thresholds were excluded from the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China, petitioner Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in its opening brief. The committee said that both the Commerce Department and the Federal Circuit have repeatedly said that the scope's descriptions of "extrusions" covers aluminum extrusions incorporated into assemblies (Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1532).
Importer Amsted Rail Co. filed a joint stipulation of voluntary dismissal in a conflict-of-interest suit at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit against the International Trade Commission for not barring attorney Daniel Pickard and his firm Buchanan Ingersoll from an AD/CVD injury proceeding. The Court of International Trade previously dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, pointing out that the case could potentially be refiled once the injury determination wraps up (see 2211160057) (Amsted Rail Co. v. ITC, Fed. Cir. # 23-1355).
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices July 3 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Exporters to Appeal CIT Decision on Jurisdiction to Hear Claim on Withdrawal From AD Suspension Deal
Tomato exporters Bioparques de Occidente and Agricola La Primavera and wholesaler Kaliroy Fresh will appeal a May Court of International Trade opinion that affirmed the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's dismissal of one count of its case challenging the Commerce Department's decision to resume an antidumping duty investigation following the termination of a suspension agreement. The claim concerned Commerce's withdrawal from a previous suspension agreement and claimed jurisdiction under Section 1581(i). While the trade court said it had jurisdiction to hear the claim, the appellate court already dismissed the challenge on substantive grounds (see 2305010071). Per the notice of appeal, the companies will take the case back to the Federal Circuit (Bioparques de Occidente, et al. v. United States, CIT # 20-00035).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a June 30 order accepted the amended opening brief and addendum filed by Kazakh exporter Tau-Ken Temir in a case on the Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available due to missed filing deadlines in an antidumping duty review. In submitting its amended brief, TKT submitted a version of its original opening brief with corrections sought by the clerk of the court and also a version with these corrections plus corrections additionally requested by the exporter. The appellate court accepted only the first form of these submissions (Tau-Ken Temir v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-2204).
CBP did not misapply the substantial evidence standard in finding that importers American Pacific Plywood, U.S. Global Forest and InterGlobal Forest evaded the antidumping and countervailing duties on hardwood plywood products from China, the Court of International Trade ruled in a June 22 opinion made public June 30.
A World Trade Organization dispute panel suspended its consideration of Russia's complaint against U.S. antidumping duties on steel and aluminum products at Russia's request, the WTO announced. The panel said that after reviewing Russia's comments and U.S. opposition, it decided to temporarily stop its work on the dispute. Per WTO rules, the panel cannot halt the work for more than 12 months.