The Court of International Trade on Dec. 26 upheld the Commerce Department's finding in the countervailing duty investigation on forged steel fluid end blocks from Germany that Germany's Konzessionsabgabenverordnung (KAV) program is not de facto specific. The program exempts from a fee gas and power pipeline companies that sell electricity below a certain price. Judge Claire Kelly said the agency reasonably used facts otherwise available to find a lack of specificity after the German government couldn't provide certain information on the program because it doesn't administer the program and would violate trade secret laws by collecting the information.

The Court of International Trade on Dec. 19 found a factual dispute regarding the extent of CBP's role in the Section 232 exclusion request process for importer G&H Diversified Manufacturing, denying the company's motion for judgment on the pleadings. G&H secured a Section 232 exclusion for goods entered under subheading 7304.29.6115 but then saw CBP liquidate its goods under subheading 7304.59.8020. Judge Timothy Reif said G&H couldn't prevail on its claim that CBP failed to consider it previously determined, on at least three separate occasions, that the company's goods are classified under subheading 7304.29.6115 as part of its role in the exclusion process.

The Court of International Trade on Dec. 19 denied importer Lionshead Specialty Tire & Wheel's bid to amend a preliminary injunction that suspends liquidation of certain trailer wheel entries to not enjoin liquidation of wheel entries found by the Commerce Department to fall outside the scope of the AD/CVD orders on steel trailer wheels from China. The matter arose in Lionshead's suit against CBP's determination that various importers evaded the AD/CVD on Chinese trailer wheels. Judge Gary Katzmann said Lionshead failed to show "changed circumstances that warrant the modification of the preliminary injunction."

The Court of International Trade in a pair of decisions sustained the Commerce Department's 33rd and 34th reviews of the antidumping duty order on tapered roller bearings from China. Judge Stephen Vaden upheld Commerce's decision on remand to use neutral facts available against respondent Shanghai Tainai Bearing Co. in the 33rd review and the agency's use of adverse facts available against the same company in the 34th review. In the 33rd review, Commerce used neutral facts available after declaring that it can't conclude that the exporter has enough control over its suppliers to induce their cooperation. In the 34th review, the agency said Tainai was aware of its suppliers' prior non-cooperation, yet failed to undertake best efforts to induce their cooperation.

Court of International Trade Judge Thomas Aquilino upheld the Commerce Department’s redetermination on remand that set at 26.05% the antidumping rate for exporter LG Chem’s superabsorbent polymers. On remand, the department switched back to a model match methodology it had used for the review’s preliminary redetermination, saying not enough evidence on the record supported the one used in its final determination (The Ad Hoc Coalition of American SAP Producers v. U.S., CIT # 23-00010).

The Court of International Trade in a decision made public Dec. 17 sustained in part and remanded in part the Commerce Department's 2021 review of the countervailing duty order on cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate from South Korea. Judge Claire Kelly sent back Commerce's finding of de facto specificity regarding the Korean government's alleged provision of electricity for less than adequate remuneration, holding that the agency failed to give an explanation for its finding that the benefit received by a "group of entities and industries it identifies is disproportionate." However, the judge upheld Commerce's refusal to accept the 2021 cost information from the state electricity company, KEPCO, as being untimely filed.

The Court of International Trade in a decision made public Dec. 13 remanded the Commerce Department's rejection of 31 of importer California Steel Industries' Section 232 exclusion requests. Judge M. Miller Baker found that Commerce failed to consider whether objector U.S. Steel Corp. could supply the entire amount of slab represented across all 31 exclusions as opposed to just the slab covered by one exclusion request. However, Baker sustained Commerce's rejection of another 14 exclusion requests from California Steel, finding that the agency reasonably found U.S. Steel could timely provide slab to the importer in a sufficient quantity.

The Court of International Trade on Dec. 16 remanded the Commerce Department’s classification of xanthan gum exporter Fufeng’s coal and its direct calculation of the exporter’s energy costs. Judge Gary Katzmann dismissed the exporter’s challenge to the Cohen’s d test and to the department’s decision to subtract Section 301 tariffs from the Fufeng’s value calculation (Neimenggu Fufeng Biotechnologies Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00068).

The Court of International Trade on Dec. 16 remanded the Commerce Department's decision to include importer Hardware Resources' edge-glued boards in the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on wood mouldings and millwork products from China. In his first decision since joining the court, Judge Joseph Laroski held that Commerce failed to consider whether Hardware Resources' products were, in fact, mouldings or millwork products under the orders' plain language.

A three-judge panel at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit remanded to the Court of International Trade for the second time a case on Meyer Corp.'s use of first sale. The ruling, issued Dec. 13, orders the CIT to once again consider whether CBP was wrong to reject the first-sale price submitted to the agency by Meyer, based on the price paid by distributors in Macau to a Thai manufacturer and by distributors in Hong Kong to a Chinese manufacturer. The manufacturers, distributors and importers share the same parent company -- Meyer International Holdings, Ltd.