The Court of International Trade in an Aug. 24 text-only order granted a partial consent motion to consolidate two cases, one of which is a consolidated action brought by two importers, challenging a CBP Enforce and Protect Act investigation. The cases concern CBP's finding that American Pacific Plywood, Far East American, Liberty Woods International and InterGlobal Forest evaded the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on hardwood plywood from China by transshipping the goods through Vietnam. The complaints include counts against CBP's alleged due process violations and determination that all the imports were covered merchandise (see 2207200031). Earlier in August, the court consolidated the Far East and American Pacific Plywood cases. The U.S. then moved to consolidate the Far East and InterGlobal cases, arguing that it would promote judicial efficiency (see 2208230026). The cases were assigned to Judge Mark Barnett (Far East American v. U.S., CIT #22-00213).
The Court of International Trade denied plaintiff Nucor's motion for a stay in a countervailing duty case, finding that the steel producer's arguments were "not persuasive." Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves denied the stay in an Aug. 23 order, declaring a stay pending resolution of another action over the same countervailing duty review "would delay the just and speedy resolution of this litigation" (Nucor Corporation v. United States, CIT #22-00137).
The Court of International Trade in an Aug. 24 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's move to drop its particular market situation adjustment for a key input of circular welded non-alloy steel pipe from South Korea in an antidumping duty review. Commerce had previously dropped the PMS adjustment for one of review's mandatory respondents but not the other. In the case's fourth remand results, the agency dropped the adjustment for the other, lowering non-selected respondent SeAH Steel Corp.'s dumping rate from 19.28% to 9.77%. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves sustained the move to drop the adjustment for the other respondent.
The Commerce Department stuck by its positions in an antidumping duty review, in Aug. 23 remand results. The agency further explained its selection of India as the primary surrogate country and its analysis of respondent NTSF Seafoods' reporting of the company's ratio of whole live fish to fillets and the moisture content of the fillets (Catfish Farmers of America v. U.S., CIT #20-00105).
The World Trade Organization published the agenda for the Aug. 29 meeting of the Dispute Settlement Body. It includes U.S. status reports on the implementation of recommendations adopted by the DSB on antidumping measures on certain hot-rolled steel products from Japan; antidumping and countervailing measures on large residential washers from South Korea; certain methodologies and their application to antidumping proceedings involving China; and Section 110(5) of the U.S. Copyright Act. A status report also is expected from Indonesia on measures relating to the import of horticultural products, animals and animal products, and from the EU on measures affecting the approval and marketing of biotech products. Turkey will report on the implementation of the DSB's recommendations on its measures on the production, importation and marketing of pharmaceutical products.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Aug. 24 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit assigned three cases to the same merits panel in a text-only note. The cases, led by Adee Honey Farms, Hilex Poly and American Drew, argue that the text of the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000 as enacted by Congress expressly requires that CBP distribute "all interest" associated with antidumping and countervailing duties to affected domestic producers. CBP contested this, arguing that delinquency interest is not included in CDSOA distributions. The Court of International Trade ruled in CBP's favor, finding that customs was right to deny payouts of delinquency interest (see 2206160074) (Adee Honey Farms v. United States, Fed. Cir. #22-2105).
The Court of International Trade should consolidate two cases -- one of which is already a consolidated action brought by two importers -- because they both are challenging the same Enforce and Protect Act determination, the U.S. argued in an Aug. 19 brief. The cases -- one led by Far East American, the other led by InterGlobal Forest -- argue that CBP wasn't authorized to initiate the EAPA investigation and that CBP violated the plaintiffs' due process rights, and should be consolidated to preserve judicial efficiency, the U.S. said (Far East American v. U.S., CIT #22-00213) (American Pacific Plywood v. U.S., CIT #22-00214).
The Court of International Trade should send back the Commerce Department's constructed value (CV) profit rate for antidumping respondent Building Systems de Mexico (BSM) if the court does not uphold the de minimis rate calculated by Commerce on remand, BSM argued in Aug. 19 comments. Arguing that the remand results should be sustained, BSM, replying to the AD petitioner, continued to critique the CV profit rate in case the de minimis rate is not upheld (Building Systems de Mexico v. United States, CIT #20-00069).
The Commerce Department unlawfully used an alternate method for calculating normal value in an antidumping duty review on goods from China, respondent Hangzhou Ailong Metal Products argued in an Aug. 22 motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade. The exporter argued Commerce illegally based normal value on the price at which the subject merchandise, square tubes, is sold in other countries, rather than base normal value on the quantity of raw materials used to make the square tubes (Hangzhou Ailong Metal Products Co. v. U.S., CIT #22-00116).