Frozen fish fillet petitioner Catfish Farmers of America again argued March 5 the U.S. was wrong to state that it hadn’t sought certain information from a review respondent, and, because of that, a gap in the record was justified (Catfish Farmers of America v. United States, CIT # 24-00082).

Pea protein exporters filed their motion for judgment March 4 in their case challenging the use of adverse facts available for China's Export Buyer's Credit Program in a countervailing duty investigation (Zhaoyuan Junbang Trading Co. v. United States, CIT # 24-00180).

Correction: In oral argument, Court of International Trade Judge Timothy Reif grappled with whether the Commerce Department reasonably selected a broader, less-specific plywood price dataset over a smaller, more specific one. He also dealt with the department’s application of adverse facts available to multilayered wood flooring review respondents after a finding of government control based on the Chinese government’s “deficient” questionnaire responses (Baroque Timber Industries (Zhongshan) Co. v. United States, CIT # 23-00136) (see 2503050059).

The U.S. filed a March 4 motion to consolidate cases brought by exporter Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations (see 2412240029) and petitioner United Steel, Paper and Forestry (see 2502070071). Both cases concern the final determination in an antidumping duty investigation on truck and bus tires from Thailand (Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations v. United States, CIT # 24-00263; United Steel, Paper and Forestry International Union v. United States, CIT # 25-00004).

Petitioner The Mosaic Company and exporter OCP again traded briefs at the Court of International Trade regarding a countervailing duty review on Moroccan-origin phosphate fertilizer. Each defended its own prior motion for judgment (see 2408120049) (The Mosaic Co. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 23-00246).

In a March 5 complaint before the Court of International Trade, German importer MTU Maintenance Hannover brought a single claim disputing CBP’s classification of a mid-frame assembly used in GE Aerospace’s LM2500 gas turbine engine. It said it had just sent the U.S.-origin product back for repairs (MTU Maintenance Hannover v. United States, CIT # 25-00023).

In a March 4 complaint before the Court of International Trade, petitioner Bio-Lab again took issue with the Commerce Department’s surrogate selection in its antidumping duty review of chlorinated isocyanurates, or pool chlorine, from China (see 2407190046) (Bio-Lab, Inc. v. United States, CIT # 25-00054).

In remand results released March 4, the Commerce Department rescinded a 2019 administrative review of a countervailing duty order with regard to Dominican aluminum extrusion exporter Kingtom Aluminio (Kingtom Aluminio v. United States, CIT # 22-00079)

Commerce should show broad deference to the "intent of the petitioner" when assessing scope rulings, a domestic petitioner argued to the Court of International Trade on March 3. The petitioner was supporting the U.S. in cases involving antidumping and countervailing duty investigations on freight rail couplers, saying that the case’s plaintiff, an exporter, had incorrectly argued that its goods were beyond the scope of the investigation due to a substantial transformation (Wabtec Corporation v. U.S., CIT #s 23-00160, -00161).

The date range proposed in a consent motion enjoining liquidation of Thai-origin truck and bus tires extends into November 2025 because that will be the end of the first administrative review period under an antidumping duty order, the U.S. explained in response to a court query (United Steel, Paper and Forestry International Union v. United States, CIT # 25-00004).