Correction: The government, on the other hand, argued that Koehler Paper is the successor-in-interest to Koehler Oberkirch because it has “voluntarily inherited the jurisdictional contacts of Koehler Oberkirch.” Koehler Oberkirch, meanwhile, is the successor-in-interest to Papierfabrik, it said (see 2503270034) (United States v. Koehler Oberkirch, CIT # 24-0001).

Antidumping duty petitioner Catfish Farmers of America dropped two cases at the Court of International Trade concerning the surrogate information used in the 2018-19 and 2019-20 reviews of the AD order on frozen fish fillets from Vietnam. The petitioner said that in light of the trade court's recent decision sustaining the Commerce Department's choice of India as a surrogate over Indonesia in a previous review of the same AD order (see 2503100059), it's dismissing its cases on the later two reviews. The petitioner said it's dropping the cases to conserve resources "while continuing to pursue issues relevant to surrogate country and value selection in ongoing and future administrative reviews" (Catfish Farmers of America v. United States, CIT #s 21-00380, 22-00125).

A petitioner March 27 supported a U.S. motion to dismiss exporter Pipe & Piling Supplies’ complaint (see 2503250054). It agreed that the pipe exporter hadn’t established the Court of International Trade has jurisdiction over it (Pipe & Piling Supplies v. United States, CIT # 24-00211).

Petitioner Catfish Farmers of America said again March 14 that a new Vietnamese frozen fish fillet exporter’s single U.S. sale wasn’t bona fide. The government’s arguments to the contrary (see 2502130061) contradicted its own past practice and were post hoc justifications, it said (Catfish Farmers of America v. United States, CIT # 24-00126).

The Commerce Department has let respondents "game the system" and avoid countervailing duty liability for an otherwise countervailable program "simply by requesting a 'verification' after the fact from a willing foreign government," petitioner Titan Tire Corp. argued in a March 28 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. Titan Tire said this system "creates a loophole that threatens to eviscerate the regulation through significant potential gamesmanship" (Titan Tire Corp. v. United States, CIT # 23-00233).

The U.S. and petitioner Catfish Farmers of America each filed responses to remands in two cases dealing, respectively, with the 2018-19 and 2019-20 administrative reviews of the antidumping duty orders on frozen fish fillets from Vietnam (Catfish Farmers of America v. United States, CIT # 21-00380; 22-00125).

Exporter Bridgestone Americas Tires opposed March 25 the U.S. motion to consolidate two cases regarding the antidumping duty investigation on truck and bus tires from Thailand (see 2503060053) (Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations v. United States, CIT # 24-00263).

The following lawsuit was filed recently at the Court of International Trade:

The U.S. on March 20 asked the Court of International Trade to dismiss exporter Pipe & Piling Supplies’ complaint for lack of jurisdiction, saying the exporter had failed to notify a USMCA panel of its lawsuit (Pipe & Piling Supplies v. United States, CIT # 24-00211).

Petitioner United Steel, Paper, and Forestry said March 24 that the U.S. was wrongly seeking to narrow the scope of passenger vehicle and light truck tires from Taiwan (United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union v. United States, CIT # 24-00165).