CIT Denies Petitioner's Bid for More Time to Respond to Injunction Request in Steel Nails AD Case
The Court of International Trade in a Jan. 5 text-only order denied the antidumping petitioner Mid Continent Steel & Wire's motion to extend time to file opposition to plaintiff Oman Fastener's bid for a preliminary injunction against cash deposit requirements. Oman Fasteners on Jan. 4 filed its opposition to the time extension request, telling the trade court that "because the continued existence of Oman Fasteners hangs precariously in the balance, and because the ten-day extension proposed by Mid Continent would compound Oman Fasteners’ substantial ongoing irreparable harm, this is that rare case" requiring the extension bid to be denied (Oman Fasteners v. United States, CIT #22-00348).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
The case concerns the sixth administrative review of the antidumping duty order on steel nails from Oman, covering entries in 2020-2021. In the past five reviews, the exporter said it received a 0.56%, zero, zero, zero and 1.65% dumping margin, respectively. Oman Fasteners was a fully cooperating respondent in the review with the only hang-up coming from the exporter's supplemental Section C questionnaire responses. Part of the response was filed 16 minutes late, resulting in a total adverse facts available rate of 154.33%.
In its complaint and motion for a PI (see 2212280043), Oman Fasteners dubbed the AFA rate "draconian" and said that the company already had to stop all U.S. shipments of its goods subject to the duties, and it will face insolvency unless it can quickly resume U.S. sales and maintain them through the case.
The trade court set up oral argument on Jan. 23 on the PI motion.