In another missed deadline case (see 2501070084, 2409100065) and 2501270069), Chinese steel rack exporter Nanjing Dongsheng Shelf Manufacturing said again March 17 that the Commerce Department shouldn’t have hit it with adverse facts available for assuming a deadline extension offered to most separate rate review respondents had also been granted to it (Nanjing Dongsheng Shelf Manufacturing Co. v. United States, CIT # 24-00085).
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices March 19 on AD/CVD proceedings:
Flatbed utility carts imported by Utility Transportation Carts aren’t subject to antidumping duties on hand trucks and parts from China, the Commerce Department said in a March 10 scope ruling. The carts lack the requisite horizontal edge or toe plate, it said.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its mandate in an antidumping duty case following importers Struxtur's and Evolutions Flooring's decision to voluntarily dismiss their appeals (see 2502110055). The case concerned the Commerce Department's use of a country-wide adverse facts available rate in calculating the AD rate for the separate rate respondents in the 2016-17 review of the AD order on multilayered wood flooring from China. A related appeal will continue to be litigated by importers led by Galleher Corp. on whether the use of AFA punishes the separate rate companies for respondent Sino-Maple's lack of cooperation and leads to an aberrational AD rate (see 2502050023) (Fuson Jinlong Wooden Group Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 25-1232).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit stayed the deadline for court-appointed amicus curiae Andrew Dhuey to submit his amicus brief in a case on the International Trade Commission's treatment of business proprietary information amid a spat over whether Dhuey can access all confidential filings in the appeal's docket. Dhuey submitted a motion seeking access to all confidential information in the case, which the government said it will oppose (In Re United States, Fed. Cir. # 24-1566).
The U.S. and Indian frozen shrimp exporter Megaa Moda supported March 7 the Commerce Department’s results on remand of an antidumping duty administrative review (see 2411270055). Finding that Megaa Moda knew certain of its home market sales would be exported required affirmative evidence that the record lacked, they said (Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 23-00202).
The Commerce Department said on remand at the Court of International Trade that importer Hardware Resources' edge-glued wood boards are wood mouldings and millwork products subject to antidumping and countervailing duty orders on that product from China (Hardware Resources v. United States, CIT # 23-00150).
Dutch mushroom exporter Prochamp said March 14 that Germany had been the right third-country comparison market in an antidumping duty investigation of its products, echoing the argument raised by the U.S. (see 2503030073) (Giorgio Foods v. United States, CIT # 23-00133).
Citing a lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the U.S. sought March 14 to have dismissed exporter J.D. Irving’s case regarding some of its entries’ cash deposit rate (J.D. Irving v. U.S., CIT #22-00256).
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices March 17 on AD/CVD proceedings: