The Court of International Trade in an Oct. 5 confidential opinion sent back parts and upheld parts of the Commerce Department's final results in the 2018 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from South Korea. In a letter submitted to the litigants, Judge Mark Barnett gave the parties until Oct. 12 to review the opinion over information that should be deemed confidential. In the case, Commerce decided not to consider off-peak electricity sold for less than adequate remuneration (Nucor Corporation v. United States, CIT #21-00182).
CBP did not violate the law by refusing to make a referral to the Commerce Department on a question of country of origin since CBP was "fully able to determine" that the wooden cabinets and vanities at issue in an Enforce and Protect Act investigation were covered by the relevant orders, petitioner Masterbrand Cabinets argued in an Oct. 4 reply brief at the Court of International Trade (Skyview Cabinet USA v. United States, CIT #22-00080).
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Oct. 5 on AD/CVD proceedings:
Passenger vehicle and light truck wheels imported by Wheel Source are not subject to antidumping and countervailing duties on steel wheels 12 to 16.5 inches in diameter from China (A-570-090/C-570-091), the Commerce Department said in a recent scope ruling. While the scope of the orders does not specifically exempt passenger vehicle wheels, the orders are intended to cover trailer wheels, Commerce said. The wheels imported by Wheel Source have hub bore sizes, offsets and load ratings that make them unsuitable for use on trailers, the agency said. The bolt pattern on one of the models of wheel imported by Wheel Source also distinguishes it from trailer wheels, it said.
Canvas that is coated or primed to promote the adherence of artist materials such as paint or ink is subject to the antidumping duty order on artist canvas from China (A-570-899), regardless of the formula of the coating and whether it can be called “gesso,” the Commerce Department said in a scope ruling issued Sept. 29.
The Commerce Department failed to adhere to the Court of International Trade's remand instructions concerning its duty to perform verification in an antidumping duty case, plaintiffs led by Bonney Forge argued in an Oct. 3 brief at the Court of International Trade. The trade court ordered Commerce to either conduct verification, even if virtually, or more fully explain why it cannot in the context of current conditions and not those of the investigation period. Bonney Forge argued that Commerce violated these instructions by basing its remand results on the conditions during the investigation (Bonney Forge Corporation v. United States, CIT #20-03837).
Importer Bral failed to clear the three-prong test needed to make a valid claim for an allowance in value for imports of plywood, the U.S. argued in an Oct. 3 reply brief at the Court of International Trade over its cross-motion for judgment. While Bral is correct that it does not make commercial sense to contract for defective goods, the importer needs to prove at a minimum that it entered into a contract with the overseas plywood producer for a good of specific qualities that is to perform in a certain way -- a bar Bral failed to meet, the brief said (Bral Corporation v. U.S., CIT #20-00154).
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
CBP filed remand results in an Enforce and Protect Act case at the Court of International Trade Oct. 3, continuing to find products from importers Ikadan System USA and Weihai Gaosai Metal are subject to the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on steel grating from China. The U.S. had filed a voluntary remand request to add the record of the Commerce Department's scope ruling to the record, but after putting it on the record, CBP stuck to its guns on the evasion finding, declaring that the scope ruling supported its initial decision (Ikadan System USA v. U.S., CIT #21-00592).
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Oct. 4 on AD/CVD proceedings: