AD Petitioner Says CIT's Worldwide Decision Irrelevant for Scope Case on Rail Couplers
The Court of International Trade's recent decision in Worldwide Door Components v. U.S. regarding a scope decision on aluminum extrusions "has no bearing" on the court's consideration of a pair of scope cases regarding freight rail couplers, petitioner the Coalition of Freight Rail Couplers said. Responding to importer Wabtec's notice of supplemental authority regarding the Worldwide decision, the petitioner said the scope of the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions is "distinct" from the scope of the AD/CVD orders on freight couplers at issue in the present case (Wabtec Corp. v. United States, CIT #'s 23-00160, -00161).
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.
In Worldwide, CIT Judge Timothy Stanceu suggested Commerce's "subassemblies provision" may violate the Tariff Act, since it allows for duties to be imposed against upstream products that aren't sold or imported in the U.S., which is a specific requirement of the Trade Act (see 2506260017). In Wabtec's cases, the company is contesting Commerce's scope decision on freight rail couplers, arguing that the agency can't impose duties on couplers, "the upstream component," that are "incorporated into downstream products that are in turn imported into the United States."
Wabtec said Stanceu's decision is highly relevant for its case (see 2506300012). The U.S. disagreed, saying that Stanceu's decision is unsupported by CAFC precedent addressing "Commerce's discretion in fashioning the scope of an order" (see 2507110017).
The coalition added to the government's arguments, claiming that Stanceu's concern is mere "dictum." The petitioner also said the "defined scope language of an order is unique to that order and cannot be applied to other cases." While in Worldwide, Commerce found that "door thresholds were assemblies that contained aluminum extrusions," here, "Commerce found that freight rail couplers were a distinct product when imported mounted to a railcar, rather than being an assembly of a finished product."