The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices April 29 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on April 28 issued a pair of decisions rejecting challenges from three exporters to the Commerce Department's decision to deny them separate antidumping duty rates in the 2012-13 and 2014-15 reviews of the antidumping duty order on new pneumatic off-the-road tires. Judges Richard Taranto, Raymond Clevenger and Todd Hughes said the exporters' claims on whether the agency can "deem decisive an exporter's failure to establish lack of state control of management selection" without more proof of state control over export activities were precluded by the appellate court's recent holding in Pirelli Tyre v. U.S.
The World Trade Organization's Dispute Settlement Body on April 25 agreed to establish a panel to review the EU's countervailing duties on new battery electric vehicles from China. The panel was created following China's second request to do so, because Beijing says the CVD violate Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (see 2408140010).
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices April 28 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a pair of decisions on April 28 upheld the Commerce Department's separate antidumping duty rate decisions in the 2012-13 and 2014-15 reviews of the AD order on new pneumatic off-the-road tires. Judges Richard Taranto, Raymond Clevenger and Todd Hughes held that the companies' claims regarding whether Commerce could "deem decisive an exporter’s failure to establish lack of state control of management selection," without more proof of state control over export activities, were precluded by the court's recent decision in Pirelli Tyre Co. v. U.S. In Pirelli, the court directly answered this question and said the agency could consider state control of management selection without tying it to export activities. The judges then turned to the record and said Commerce's decision to reject the separate rate bids for all three companies was backed by substantial evidence.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices April 25 on AD/CVD proceedings:
No lawsuits have been filed recently at the Court of International Trade.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices April 24 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on April 21 issued its mandate after finding in February that CBP didn't need to refer the question of whether petitioner CP Kelco still made oilfield xanthan gum to the Commerce Department in an antidumping duty evasion case. The appellate court said the evidence didn't support such a referral and, in any case, the referral would only apply to future merchandise and not the goods subject to the evasion case (see 2502270018). The Federal Circuit also said CBP permissibly used adverse inferences against the manufacturers of the subject xanthan gum given their failure to submit requested information, notwithstanding the full participation of the importers subject to the proceeding (All One God Faith v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1078).