The Court of International Trade upheld the Commerce Department's antidumping duty investigation on pentafluoroethane (R-125) -- a gas used in refrigerants -- from China in a decision made public Jan. 10.

The Commerce Department failed to justify its finding that a subsidy to exporter OCP from a program for relief from tax fines and penalties was de facto specific, the Court of International Trade held on Jan. 8. Remanding the countervailing duty investigation on phosphate fertilizers from Morocco for a second time, Judge Timothy Stanceu said the agency's altered defense of its specificity finding was no less "absurd" than it was in the first go-round.

The Court of International Trade on Jan. 8 denied the government's bid for default judgment against importer Rayson Global and its owner and CEO Doris Cheng in a customs penalty case, with Judge Timothy Stanceu taking issue with the U.S. claim for a monetary penalty totaling nearly $3.4 million.

Importer Retractable Technologies on Jan. 7 dropped its lawsuit at the Court of International Trade against the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative's 100% Section 301 duty hike on needles and syringes. The company voluntarily dismissed the action without prejudice and declined to comment on the decision (Retractable Technologies v. United States, CIT # 24-00185).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Jan. 8 heard oral argument in the massive Section 301 litigation, primarily probing the litigants' positions regarding how to interpret the term "modify" in the statute and whether the statute allows the U.S. trade representative to impose duties in response to retaliatory measures from China (HMTX Industries v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1891).

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 U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Jan. 7 clarified the standard Commerce must follow when determining how high it can set a review respondent’s antidumping duty rate based on adverse inferences. Rejecting a "single sentence" justification for an adverse facts available rate Commerce offered in the final results of a review, it held the department may not drastically depart from accuracy without establishing a "particularly strong need to deter noncompliance" based on record evidence showing unreasonable negligence or intentional misconduct.

3D importer Quantified Operations on Jan. 5 asked the Court of International Trade to compel discovery in its classification case. The importer said the government was trying to hide behind the deliberative process privilege without meeting the procedural requirements for it (Quantified Operations Limited v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 22-00178).

The International Trade Commission erred when it found that aluminum extrusion exports from 14 nations didn't injure the U.S. industry, AD/CVD petitioners the U.S. Aluminum Extruders Coalition and the United Steelworkers argued in a Jan. 3 complaint at the Court of International Trade. The seven-count complaint challenged, among other things, the commission's conclusions that the extrusions didn't undersell the domestic like product nor have "significant adverse price effects" (U.S. Aluminum Extruders Coalition v. United States, CIT # 25-00001)

Antidumping petitioner Coalition of American Manufacturers of Mobile Access Equipment took to the Court of International Trade on Jan. 3 to challenge the Commerce Department's surrogate value picks in the 2022-23 review of the antidumping duty order on mobile access equipment from China. The petitioner filed a 12-count complaint to contest 12 different surrogate data picks (Coalition of American Manufacturers of Mobile Access Equipment v. United States, CIT # 24-00219).