The United States sought Feb. 28 a rehearing of the Court of International Trade’s decision regarding the classification of precut chordal, radial and web fabric pieces used in airplane brakes. The products’ importer, Honeywell, would avoid duties if the ruling stands (Honeywell International Inc. v. U.S., CIT # 17-00256).

The Commerce Department placed an "undue emphasis on prefabrication" in a scope ruling on pencils in violation of its own regulations and case law, importer School Specialty said in a Feb. 27 brief at the Court of International Trade. Responding to claims from the U.S. and petitioner Dixon Ticonderoga Co., School Specialty said Commerce's "unreasonable fixation on 'prefabrication'" led the agency to "misjudge the true complexity and importance of the processing that occurs in the Philippines" (School Specialty v. United States, CIT # 24-00098).

The Commerce Department complied with the Court of International Trade's previous order telling the agency to accept a submission from antidumping duty respondent Grupo Simec that was previously rejected for being untimely, the trade court held on Feb. 28. Judge Stephen Vaden said the agency properly followed the court's instruction and reduced the 66.7% adverse facts available duty rate on Grupo Simec to zero percent.

Wooden cabinet importers referring to themselves as Cabinetworks Companies made a number of arguments Feb. 26 opposing a Commerce Department scope ruling, culminating in an attack on the department’s country-wide antidumping and countervailing duty determinations (ACProducts v. United States, CIT #s 24-00155, -00156).

CBP didn't need to refer the question of whether petitioner CP Kelco still made oilfield xanthan gum to the Commerce Department in an antidumping duty evasion case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held on Feb. 27. Judges Kimberly Moore, Todd Hughes and Tiffany Cunningham said the evidence didn't support such a referral and, in any case, such a referral would only apply to future merchandise and not the goods subject to the evasion case.

The Commerce Department didn’t err in applying adverse facts available to exporter Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret for a subsidy program that the agency only became aware of due to a letter from the exporter it rejected as untimely, the U.S. and petitioner Rebar Action Coalition said Feb. 21 in two briefs opposing the exporter's motion for judgment (Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret v. U.S., CIT #24-00096).

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.

Steel importer Seneca Foods Corp. urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Feb. 21 to overturn the Commerce Department's rejection of its Section 232 steel tariff exclusion requests, claiming its approach to exclusion requests "sought to ensure that the President's aims" in imposing the tariffs "would be fully realized." Seneca said the fact that U.S. Steel Corp., which objected to Seneca's requests, "declined to supply the very same volumes for which Seneca sought exclusions should be dispositive" (Seneca Foods Corp. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 25-1310).

The Court of International Trade upheld on Feb. 25 the Commerce Department's inclusion of Precision Components' low-carbon steel blanks in the scope of the antidumping duty order on tapered roller bearings from China. Judge Joseph Laroski said Commerce was entirely in line when it considered a prior scope ruling asked for by Precision and concluded that the products at issue in the prior scope ruling were identical to the products considered in the subsequent scope case.

A Vietnamese shrimp exporter trade group challenged the International Trade Commission's finding that frozen warmwater shrimp from Ecuador, India, Indonesia and Vietnam injured the U.S. industry. Filing a complaint on Feb. 21, the group challenged the ITC's finding of significant price underselling and on the "interchangeability between" farm-raised and wild-caught shrimp as evidence of the "degree of competition between" imports and domestic production and the "consequent effect on prices" (Shrimp Committee of the Vietnam Association of Seafood Exporters and Producers v. United States, CIT # 25-00032).