In a motion for judgment, exporter CS Wind Malaysia again said the Commerce Department should have adjusted its manufacturing costs for a production stoppage throughout most of the period of an administrative review of an antidumping duty order (see 2409090008) (CS Wind Malaysia v. U.S., CIT # 24-00150).

The Court of International Trade reassigned a case on importer Meyer Corp.'s claim for first sale valuation on its cookware imports, from Judge Thomas Aquilino to Judge Richard Eaton. In his first decision in the case, Aquilino questioned whether first sale valuation could be used for goods coming from non-market economies. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said CBP has no basis to consider a nation's NME status when deciding whether to grant first sale treatment, sending the case back for consideration of Meyer's shipments (see 2208110060). In his second opinion, Aquilino said the imports at issue don't quality for first sale treatment due to the failure of Meyer's parent company, Meyer International Holdings, to submit financial information (see 2302090053). This decision is now before the Federal Circuit again, which held oral argument in September 2024 (see 2409040034) (Meyer Corp. v. United States, CIT # 13-00154).

Importer Shamrock Building Materials filed a stipulation of dismissal in its customs case at the Court of International Trade on Feb. 7. The importer brought the suit to contest CBP's classification of its electrical metallic tubing finished conduit and intermediate metal conduit under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 7306.30.1000 or 7306.30.5028, dutiable at 25%. The company said the products should fall under duty-free subheading 8547.90.0020. Counsel for Shamrock didn't respond to a request for comment (Shamrock Building Materials v. United States, CIT # 21-00571).

Importers and exporters led by Amsted Rail Co. stipulated the dismissal of one of their rail coupler cases and sought to amend their complaint in another Feb. 7 (Amsted Rail Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00242, -00268).

The Commerce Department unreasonably found that a sales-based particular market situation doesn't exist in Turkey, thus erring in picking Turkey as a third country comparison market in the antidumping duty investigation on melamine from Qatar, petitioner Cornerstone Chemical Co. argued in a Feb. 7 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Cornerstone Chemical Co. v. United States, CIT # 25-00005).

Responding to an exporter’s comments on remand results (see 2412230074), the government said Feb. 3 that the Commerce Department fully complied with a second remand order by the Court of International Trade (see 2406270043). The trade court had ordered it to further explain its selection of a second mandatory respondent in a separate rate review on passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China (YC Rubber Co. (North America) v. U.S., CIT # 19-00069).

A domestic steel trade group brought a complaint to the Court of International Trade Feb. 7 alleging that a mandatory respondent in a tire antidumping duty review “was attempting to pass off an [non-market economy] entity as a market-economy entity” and should have been hit with adverse facts available (United Steel, Paper and Forestry International Union v. United States, CIT # 25-00004).

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

Petitioner CP Kelco U.S. withdrew as a defendant-intervenor in an Enforce and Protect Act evasion case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in a Feb. 6 motion. The appellate court held oral argument in the case in October 2024, indicating that the plaintiff, xanthan gum importer All One God Faith, doing business as Dr. Bronner's Magic Soaps, likely would not succeed in reversing the Court of International Trade's dismissal of the case, since its entries have all been liquidated (see 2410160048). Counsel for CP Kelco didn't respond to request for comment (All One God Faith v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1078).

The U.S. government fully supported the Commerce Department's decision not to use adverse facts available against exporter Can Tho Import Export Seafood Joint Stock Co. in the 2020-21 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on frozen fish fillets from Vietnam, the exporter argued in a Feb. 5 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. Can Tho Import Export said Commerce properly found that the respondent fully cooperated in the review and that Commerce correctly rejected the petitioner's allegation of a ministerial error (Catfish Farmers of America v. United States, CIT # 24-00082).