The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Commerce Department does not need an additional 91 days to produce a remand redetermination on a scope ruling involving antidumping and countervailing duties on common alloy aluminum sheet from China, importer Valeo said in a March 14 response motion at the Court of International Trade (Valeo North America v. United States, CIT # 21-00581).
Four U.S. steel companies failed to show that they had a right to intervene in a case contesting the International Trade Commission's decision not to review an antidumping injury proceeding on hot-rolled steel imports from Turkey, exporter Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari (Erdemir) argued in a March 14 motion. Erdemir said the companies -- Cleveland-Cliffs, Nucor Corp., Steel Dynamics and SSAB Enterprises -- "blurred standards, omitted material facts of cases, and misrepresented the holdings of cases" (Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari v. U.S. , CIT # 22-00349).
Exporter China Custom Manufacturing will file a motion for a rehearing and seek en banc review of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision finding the company's solar panel mounts do not qualify for the "finished merchandise" exclusion from the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China, George Tuttle, counsel for CCM, told Trade Law Daily (China Custom Manufacturing Inc. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-1345).
The Court of International Trade on March 16 upheld the International Trade Commission's finding of critical circumstances in antidumping and countervailing duty investigations on small vertical shaft engines from China because of a surge in imports shortly before the antidumping and countervailing duties took effect. Judge M. Miller Baker ruled against plaintiff MTD Products' arguments that the ITC used faulty data and improperly weighed the data it did use. MTD said the ITC based its findings on export data subject to large lead times, inaccurate comparison periods and artificial increases in volume due to COVID-19. Baker said the "court will not second-guess" the ITC's findings.
The Commerce Department can legally deduct President Donald Trump's Section 232 duties from an exporter's U.S. price in antidumping duty proceedings, raising the respondent's dumping margin, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled March 15. Judges Richard Taranto, Kara Stoll and Tiffany Cunningham said Trump's proclamation imposing the duties made clear that the Section 232 tariffs were meant to be added to any applicable antidumping duties. However, the appellate court clarified that this ruling only applies to Trump's Section 232 duties and not all presidential action taken under Section 232.
The Court of International Trade on March 16 upheld the Commerce Department's final determination in the countervailing duty investigation into aluminum sheet from Turkey. Judge M. Miller Baker said that Commerce "easily" defeated respondent Teknik Aluminyum Sanayi's challenge to Commerce's use of a questionnaire in lieu of on-site verification since Teknik cited no authority requiring the agency to carry out a certain verification procedure during a global pandemic. Baker also upheld Commerce's use of partial adverse facts available over Teknik's failure to submit screenshots of audited financial statements and ledgers, citing Teknik's failure to submit certain information in the form and manner requested.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices March 15 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The Court of International Trade on March 14 granted defendant-intervenor Endura Products' bid to withdraw from an Enforce and Protect Act case on whether Columbia Aluminum Products evaded the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China. Endura bowed out of the proceeding after it fell short on its request for a stay in the action pending the resolution of a scope proceeding also at the trade court (see 2302220027). The company said it no longer is interested in the appeal (Columbia Aluminum Products v. United States, CIT Consol. # 19-00185).
DOJ has asked the Court of International Trade permission to add AB MA Distribution Corporation as a defendant alongside Zhe "John" Liu and GL Paper Distribution in an amended complaint in a penalty case at the Court of International Trade. AB MA is allegedly a shell company through which Liu continued an illegal transshipment scheme to import Chinese-origin wire hangers through Malaysia, India and Thailand in order to evade antidumping and countervailing duties (see 2302070047) (United States v. Zhe "John" Liu, CIT # 22-00215).