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 Court of International on Oct. 6 sustained the Commerce Department's 2023 review of the countervailing duty order on steel concrete reinforcing bar from Turkey. Following a remand on the agency's de jure specificity finding of an exemption from Turkey's Banking and Insurance Transactions Tax on foreign exchange transactions and its selection of a report from Colliers international to use as the benchmark to value rent-free lease of land to respondent Kaptan's affiliate, Judge Gary Katzmann upheld Commerce's decisions not to countervail the tax exemption but to stick with the Colliers report. Regarding the specificity determination, Katzmann said he already rejected the claims that the tax exemption was de jure specific, adding that the agency operated within its discretion in not engaging in more of a de facto specificity investigation or using adverse facts available given the Turkish government's failure to provide requested information on remand.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Oct. 6 sent back the Commerce Department's antidumping duty investigation on carbon and alloy steel cut-length-plate from Germany. Judges Alan Lourie, Timothy Dyk and Jimmie Reyna upheld Commerce's rejection of respondent AG der Dillinger Huttenwerke's proposed adjustments to the agency's model-match methodology, though the judges said it was "unreasonable for Commerce to use likely selling price as facts otherwise available for cost of production." The court stressed that "when there is a gap to fill" in the record, "there must be a reasonable relationship between the selected facts otherwise available and the gap to be filled."

The Commerce Department adequately supported its decision to find that antidumping respondent Compania Valencia de Aluminio Baux and its affiliate, Bancolor Baux, only sold common alloy aluminum sheet in one level of trade in its home market of Spain, the Court of International Trade held on Sept. 25. Judge Mark Barnett said the relevant AD statute doesn't require Commerce to "recognize a distinct level of trade in connection with any differences in selling activities," finding the agency's level of trade regulations to comply with the AD laws.

The Court of International Trade on Sept. 25 sustained CBP's finding that Blue Pipe Steel Center evaded the antidumping duty order on circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Thailand. While Blue Pipe consented to the application of the evasion determination to its goods after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the Commerce Department's scope ruling including its dual-stenciled pipe in the order, the company said the determination should run from the start of the scope inquiry and not the start of the evasion investigation. Judge Timothy Reif rejected this request, finding that the Enforce and Protect Act's lack of a "reasonable notice" requirement and the fact that the AD order had no clear exclusions warrants applying the evasion determination to the start of the investigation.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Sept. 25 upheld the Lists 3 and 4A Section 301 tariffs. CAFC Judges Todd Hughes and Alan Lourie, along with Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the Eastern District of Texas, who was sitting by designation, said the tariffs were a valid exercise of the government's authority under Section 307(a)(1)(C), which lets the U.S. Trade Representative "modify or terminate any action" taken under Section 301, where such action is "no longer appropriate."

The Court of International Trade on Sept. 23 remanded CBP's finding that Dominican exporter Kingtom Aluminio made its aluminum extrusions using forced labor. Judge Timothy Reif held that CBP failed to "articulate a satisfactory explanation for its action" based on a "rational connection between the facts found and the choice made" in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. Reif likened the case to the court's previous consideration of a company's challenge to its placement on the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List. The judge said CBP's "conclusory, unsupported allegations" of forced labor made with regards to Kingtom are "readily distinguishable" from the "substantive statements" made in defense of the UFLPA Entity List addition.

The Court of International Trade on Sept. 22 denied the government's motion for reconsideration in importer BASF's customs case on the classification of its fish oil ethyl ester concentrates. Judge Joseph Laroski rejected the government's claims that the court, in finding that the concentrates are "extracts of fish" under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 1603 (see 2506040076), overlooked that fish extracts must have similar characteristics to meat extracts and ignored BASF's stipulation that its preparations aren't fatty acids. Laroski said the court explicitly addressed the claim regarding meat extracts and considered BASF's stipulation.

The Court of International Trade on Sept. 15 upheld the Commerce Department's decision not to collapse antidumping duty respondent Dalmine with its affiliated input supplier Silcotub in the 2021-22 administrative review of the AD order on mechanical tubing of carbon and alloy steel from Italy. Judge M. Miller Baker said Commerce properly followed the relevant statute in finding that Silcotub, a Romania-based company, can't be collapsed with Dalmine, since Silcotub isn't a producer of subject merchandise. The judge said that Commerce didn't impermissibly rely on this rationale post hoc, since it's an issue of "statutory construction," which is exempted from the bar against post hoc rationalizations.

The Court of International Trade on Sept. 15 sustained the Commerce Department's surrogate value pick for antidumping respondent Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry's plywood input in the 2019-21 review of the AD order on multilayered wood flooring from China after three prior remands. After Commerce repeatedly stuck by its decision to adjust Brazilian plywood data to remove data from Spain, the agency changed course in its third remand results, deciding to use "historical data for Brazilian plywood imports and period of review import data from Malaysia." No party challenged the result.