Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative can’t demonstrate good cause for a Section 301 remand deadline extension “that would leave uncured its established legal violation for another two months to the continuing detriment of American businesses and consumers,” Akin Gump lawyers for Section 301 litigation test plaintiffs HMTX Industries and Jasco Products said in an opposition brief June 21 at the Court of International Trade in docket 1:21-cv-00052.

The Court of International Trade in a June 17 opinion denied exporter Shanghai Tainai Bearing's and importer C&U Americas' bid for an injunction against cash deposits at the antidumping duty rate decided in the 2019-20 review of the AD order on tapered roller bearings from China. Judge Stephen Vaden said that the plaintiffs failed to establish a likelihood to succeed on the merits or suffer irreparable harm and that the balance of equities and public interest favored the U.S. government.

With less than two weeks to spare before the June 30 deadline for the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative to file its remand results in the Section 301 litigation, the agency needs a 60-day extension to Aug. 29 due to the volume of work involved, the agency’s limited staff resources and other projects that are compounding its workload, DOJ said June 17 at the Court of International Trade. Akin Gump lawyers for test-case plaintiffs HMTX Industries and Jasco Products oppose the motion and soon will file a response, DOJ said. Matthew Nicely, Akin Gump’s lead attorney, declined to comment June 17.

The Commerce Department properly used the expected method to determine the non-selected respondent's rate in an antidumping duty review of steel nails from Taiwan, the Court of International Trade said in a June 16 opinion. Judge Mark Barnett ruled that the burden was on the plaintiffs, led by PrimeSource Building Products, to establish that the expected method -- the practice of averaging adverse facts available rates in the absence of non-AFA, zero or de minimis margins -- should not be used. The judge ruled that the plaintiffs gave no evidence to back their claim that the expected method was not reasonably reflective of their actual margins.

The Court of International Trade in a June 15 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's final determination in the 2019 antidumping duty investigation on wood mouldings and millwork products from Brazil. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves ruled that Commerce properly combined the three mandatory respondents -- Araupel, Braslumber Industria de Molduras and BrasPine Madeiras -- into a single entity and correctly didn't apply the major input rule to certain log purchases. Commerce was also right to revise Araupel's general and administrative expenses to account for fair value adjustments associated with the annual revaluation of standing trees in the company's unharvested forests, the court said. The result is a zero percent dumping margin for the collapsed entity.

CBP properly denied payouts of interest assessed after liquidation, known as delinquency interest, on collected antidumping and countervailing duties under the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000, the Court of International Trade said in a series of five nearly identical opinions. Judge Timothy Stanceu ruled that it must rely on CBP's interpretation of how to administer the CDSOA and define how interest is earned on AD/CV duties given ambiguities in the statute pertaining to delinquency interest. The court also held that given that the interest is put into a single sum after liquidation, it loses its "individual character" and is no longer interest earned on the duties.

The Commerce Department properly found that Shelter Forest International Acquisition's hardwood plywood exports didn't circumvent the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on hardwood plywood from China, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said in a June 15 opinion. Affirming the Court of International Trade's opinion, the Federal Circuit said that the merchandise was commercially available before Dec. 8, 2016, and was thus not later-developed merchandise that circumvented the AD/CVD orders.

CBP no longer believes importers Global Aluminum Distributor and Hialeah Aluminum Supply evaded the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China by transshipping them through Dominican manufacturer Kingtom Aluminio. Filing its remand results at the Court of International Trade in a case related to the Enforce and Protect Act investigation, CBP said that after taking another look at the record, it cannot conclude that evasion took place (Global Aluminum Distributor v. United States, CIT #21-00198).

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.