No lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade.

Exporter Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co. asked the Court of International Trade to compel the Commerce Department not to make adjustments to the plywood surrogate value in the 2019-20 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on multilayered wood flooring from China. The exporter said in an Aug. 20 brief that, after two remands, the court "has been patient with Commerce," but the agency "has now demonstrated that it has no reasonable explanation for its methodology yet sticks to its unsupported position" (Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. # 22-00190).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Aug. 20 deconsolidated two appeals on the countervailing duty investigation on Russian phosphate fertilizers, dismissing one brought by exporters Phosagro PJSC and JSC Apatit for failure to prosecute. Exporter Industrial Group Phosphorite brought the other appeal, claiming that the Commerce Department contradicted the countervailing duty statute in finding that the Russian government's provision of natural gas was de facto specific (see 2408080058) (The Mosaic Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. #'s 24-1593, -1595).

Importers Wabtec Corp. and Strato filed a scathing motion for judgment on Aug. 19 contesting the International Trade Commission's affirmative injury determination on freight rail couplers from China. The companies contested the commission's decision to rule on the issue at all, seeing as the proceeding was brought just weeks after the commission found that freight rail couplers from China didn't injure the U.S. market (Wabtec Corp. v. United States, CIT # 23-00157).

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

The Court of International Trade on Aug. 16 reassigned an antidumping duty scope case on Chinese garlic from Judge Gary Katzmann to Judge M. Miller Baker. Importer Marcatus QED filed suit, claiming the Commerce Department erred in finding that the company's shipments of preserved garlic in brine fell within the scope of the AD order on fresh garlic from China (see 2406140039). Baker already has been assigned at least one other case related to the scope of antidumping duties on Chinese garlic (see 2408090042) (Marcatus QED v. U.S., CIT # 24-00091).

Antidumping duty petitioner Catfish Farmers of America on Aug. 15 opposed the Commerce Department's remand results in a suit on the 2017-18 administrative review of the AD order on frozen fish fillets from Vietnam. In comments submitted to the Court of International Trade, the petitioner contested Commerce's conclusion that India offered better quality surrogate value data than Indonesia for generally valuing the fish fillets' factors of production (Catfish Farmers of America v. U.S., CIT # 20-00105).

Nonprofit advocacy group Texans for Israel and four of its members filed suit earlier this month to contest the constitutionality of President Joe Biden's executive order allowing for sanctions against those who undermine "peace, security, and stability in the West Bank" (Texans for Israel v. U.S. Department of the Treasury, N.D. Tex. # 2:24-00167).

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

The U.S. and antidumping duty petitioner Mid Continent Steel & Wire defended the Commerce Department's use of the Cohen's d test to detect "masked" dumping, in a pair of reply briefs at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Taiwanese steel nail exporters, led by PT Enterprise, challenged Commerce's use of a simple average for the denominator of the Cohen's d coefficient instead of a weighted average (Mid Continent Steel & Wire v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 24-1556).