The Court of International Trade in a Dec. 2 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's final results in the 2017 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on steel reinforcing bar from Turkey. Judge Claire Kelly found that it was reasonable for Commerce to assign non-mandatory respondent Colakoglu a rate from a previous administrative review where it did serve as a mandatory respondent, even though both actual mandatory respondents in the review at issue in the case received de minimis rates. Kelly also said that it did not matter that record evidence did not support the CVD rate received by Colakoglu since it is its responsible to populate the record, which it failed to do.
World Trade Organization members heard two requests for dispute panels at the Nov. 29 meeting of the Dispute Settlement Body, the WTO said. The European Union sought a panel over Russian state-owned entities' procurement practices, and Costa Rica requested a panel over the Dominican Republic's antidumping duties on corrugated steel bars from Costa Rica.
A California table olive industry trade association declared victory over a recent World Trade Organization challenge to U.S. antidumping and countervailing duties on ripe olives from Spain following the WTO's ruling, declaring that the trade organization gave "the outcome of which will enable the U.S. Government to continue effectively enforcing the U.S. olive trade remedy cases," it said in an emailed press release Nov. 30. Despite the WTO panel's finding that some aspects of U.S. countervailing duties violate WTO rules (see 2111190028), the Olive Growers Council of California said the WTO ruling was a win for the California olive growers, and that the antidumping and countervailing duties will help the growers stabilize and rebuild.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Nov. Dec. 1 on AD/CV duty proceedings:
Mechanical tubing base shells imported by Mando America are not subject to antidumping duties on circular welded non-alloy steel pipe from Mexico and South Korea (A-201-805/A-580-809), the Commerce Department said in a scope ruling issued Nov. 22.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its mandate on Nov. 29 in a case in which it found it lacked jurisdiction over a tapered roller bearing importer's challenge to guidance issued from the Commerce Department to CBP on the assessment of antidumping duties. In the Sept. 2 decision, the appellate court upheld the Court of International Trade decision denying Wanxing America Corporation's bid to challenge the guidance under the trade court's residual jurisdiction, Section 1581(i). The Federal Circuit said the action could've been properly filed under Sections 1581(a) or 1581(c). WAC argued it should have been subject to its parent company's zero percent dumping rate (see 2109020039) (Wanxiang America Corporation v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 20-1044).
The Court of International Trade remanded the Commerce Department's final results in the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on hot-rolled steel flat products from Australia covering entries in 2016-2017, in a Nov. 30 confidential opinion. The case, filed by mandatory respondent BlueScope Steel Ltd., challenged the final results for hitting BlueScope with adverse facts available. The seven-count action alleged, among other things, that Commerce's decision to apply AFA based on the fact that BlueScope withheld requested information is contradicted by record evidence. In a letter submitted to the litigants, Judge Richard Eaton said he wants bracketed information reviewed by Dec. 7 (BlueScope Steel Ltd., et al. v. United States, CIT #19-00057).
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with some recent top stories. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The Commerce Department must reconsider its use of an adverse inference in an antidumping review on Italian pasta since it failed to find out whether a respondent did not to cooperate to the best of its ability, the Court of International Trade said in a Nov. 30 opinion. However, the court upheld the remaining elements of the decision, including Commerce's use of facts available and the agency's rejection of the respondent's post-verification arguments for different classification systems for the pasta's protein content and shape.