The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Jan. 10 issued its mandate in a case on the Commerce Department's use of a particular market situation adjustment to the sales-below-cost test in antidumping duty cases. In the opinion, the appellate court sustained Commerce's remand results dropping the adjustment for two respondents to the 2018 AD review of circular welded carbon steel pipes from Thailand (see 2312040025). The court said petitioner Wheatland Tube Co. failed to distinguish the case from the holding in Hyundai Steel v. U.S., in which the court first ruled against the PMS adjustment (Saha Thai Steel Pipe Public Co. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-1175).

Exporters Carbon Activated Tianjin Co. and Carbon Activated Corp. on Jan. 9 dismissed their appeal of the Commerce Department's final results of the 2021-22 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on activated carbon from China. Carbon Activated is pursuing other cases at the trade court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit regarding prior reviews of the AD order (see 2311080037). No reason was given for the voluntary dismissal (Carbon Activated Tianjin Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00266).

The Commerce Department is set to lower the countervailing duty for two Chinese solar cell exporters, removing adverse facts available rates for certain programs and changing several cost calculation methods, it said in remand results filed with the Court of International Trade (Risen Energy Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00231).

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

The Court of International Trade issued its judgment in a customs case on action camera maker GoPro Inc.'s camera housings just under two weeks after issuing its opinion in the case. In the Dec. 28 opinion, the court said the camera housings are camera parts and not cases, able to enter the U.S. duty-free (see 2312280038). On Jan. 9, Judge Timothy Reif granted GoPro's motion for summary judgment (GoPro Inc. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 20-00176).

Tire exporters Guizhou Tyre Co. and Aeolus Tyre Co. asked for 6,000 more words for their opening brief after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rejected their bid to submit two separate briefs. The companies noted that they received the government's consent and there's "good cause" to expand the word count (Guizhou Tyre Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2163).

A Moroccan exporter argued the Commerce Department can't ask open-ended questions about whether governments provided it any “other” subsidies, in questionnaires sent during administrative reviews (OCP S.A. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00261).

The U.S. defended the results, on voluntary remand, of its antidumping duty investigation on forged steel fluid end blocks from Germany, saying the Commerce Department wasn't allowed to adjust its calculations of an exporter’s costs of production in response to a particular market situation (Ellwood City Forge Co. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 21-00077).

Commenting upon the results of a second remand, Chinese cabinet exporter Ancientree Cabinet Co. challenged the Commerce Department’s continued use of adverse facts available when calculating the exporter’s countervailing duty rate, imposed because Commerce claimed it couldn't verify the exporter’s participation in China’s Export Buyer’s Credit Program (Dalian Meisen Woodworking Co. v. U.S., CIT # 20-00110).

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