The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Oct. 8 held that the Commerce Department's "cross-ownership regulation" turns on whether the purpose of the subsidy provided to a cross-owned input provider "is to benefit the production of both the input and downstream products." In clarifying how the regulation is to be applied, Judges Jimmie Reyna, William Bryson and Kara Stoll held that the Court of International Trade was right to reject Commerce's application of this regulation to countervailing duty respondent Gujarat Fluorochemicals in the countervailing duty investigation on polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) resin from India.
Court of International Trade Judge Timothy Stanceu joined many of his colleagues in granting the government's motions to stay its case before him, pending the federal government shutdown. Like other CIT judges, Stanceu ordered the government to file a status report within 10 days of the appropriations lapse ending to establish new filing deadlines (see 2510020051).
Dominican exporter Kingtom Aluminio opposed the U.S. government's request to stay the company's lawsuit against CBP pending the lapse in federal appropriations. Kingtom, which is challenging CBP's finding that it made its aluminum extrusions with forced labor, argued that a stay would harm the company and that the U.S. "has made no showing of clear hardship if the stay is denied" (Kingtom Aluminio v. United States, CIT # 24-00264).
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Sept. 29 upheld the Office of Foreign Assets Control's addition of Iranian company Bahman Group to the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN) list. Judge Randolph Moss held that OFAC's denial of Bahman's delisting petition wasn't impermissibly predetermined, finding that even if OFAC's decision could be set aside under the Administrative Procedure Act for being pre-decided, "the record offers no basis for concluding that OFAC’s decision-making in this case was pretextual or irredeemably biased under any standard" (Bahman Group v. Lisa Palluconi, D.D.C. # 22-3826).
Judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit pressed counsel for importer Blue Sky the Color of Imagination and the government during oral argument on Oct. 7 in the importer's customs classification suit on its notebooks with calendars. During the argument, Judges Alan Lourie, Raymond Chen and William Bryson grappled with whether the court is bound by its 2010 ruling in Mead v. U.S. and whether the goods are properly classified as calendars or diaries (Blue Sky The Color of Imagination v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1710).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Oct. 8 affirmed the Court of International Trade's rejection of the Commerce Department's application of its "cross-ownership regulation" to countervailing duty respondent Gujarat Fluorochemicals in the CVD investigation of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) resin from India. In the investigation, Commerce attributed a subsidy received by Inox Wind to Gujarat, since Inox sold the respondent wind power that constituted only 1.03% of total power consumed by the company.
The Commerce Department erred in deciding to "smooth" antidumping duty respondent Prolamsa's production costs in the 2022-23 administrative review of the AD order on heavy walled rectangular carbon welded steel pipes and tubes from Mexico, Prolamsa argued in an Oct. 3 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Productos Laminados de Monterrey v. United States, CIT # 25-00195).
The Commerce Department properly decided on remand not to countervail an exemption from Turkey's Banking and Insurance Transactions Tax on foreign exchange transactions, the Court of International Trade held in an Oct. 6 decision. In upholding the 2023 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on steel concrete reinforcing bar from Turkey, Judge Gary Katzmann also sustained Commerce's decision to use a report from Colliers International as the benchmark for valuing the rent-free lease of land to respondent Kaptan's affiliate Nur over a report from Cushman & Wakefield.
A World Trade Organization dispute panel on Oct. 2 found that the EU violated its WTO commitments in its antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings on stainless steel cold-rolled flat products from Indonesia. Specifically, the dispute panel rejected the European Commission's attempt to countervail Chinese transnational subsidies in the Indonesian steel sector.
The Commerce Department erred in using likely selling prices as facts otherwise available for antidumping duty respondent AG der Dillinger Huttenwerke's cost of production, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held on Oct. 6. Judges Alan Lourie, Timothy Dyk and Jimmie Reyna held that where there's a gap to fill on the record, "there must be a reasonable relationship between the selected facts otherwise available and the gap to be filled."