The Commerce Department's antidumping duty order on artist canvas from China is "void-for-vagueness and unconstitutional," importer Printing Textiles, doing business as Berger Textiles, told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in its opening brief. The company argued that Commerce's "impermissibly unlawful" scope ruling including its canvas banner matisse within the scope of the order "denied Berger adequate notice," adding that the agency "failed to address due process concerns of vague language in the scope of the order" (Printing Textiles v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 25-1213).

The following new lawsuits have been filed recently at the Court of International Trade:

The Commerce Department erred in selecting Turkey and not Bulgaria as the main surrogate country in the 2022-23 review of the antidumping duty order on pure magnesium from China, exporters Tianjin Magnesium International Co. and Tianjin Magnesium Metal Co. argued in a Jan. 27 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Tianjin Magnesium International Co. v. United States, CIT # 25-00002).

The Commerce Department erred in picking Malaysia as the main surrogate country in the 2022-23 review of the antidumping duty order on activated carbon from China, exporter Carbon Activated Corp. argued in a Jan. 27 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Carbon Activated said that Romania was the better choice and that Commerce's use of Malaysia surrogate values for coal tar, sub-bituminous coal, hydrochloric acid, solid sodium hydroxide and potassium hydroxide was unsupported by substantial evidence (Carbon Activated Tianjin Co. v. United States, CIT # 24-00265).

Two multilayered wood flooring exporters, Baroque Industries and Riverside Plywood, said Jan. 23 that the Commerce Department wrongly applied adverse facts available to several of Baroque’s input suppliers, determining they were under government control even though “[n]ecessary information for these eighteen suppliers was not missing from the record” (Baroque Timber Industries (Zhongshan) Co. v. United States, CIT # 24-00106).

Defendant-intervenor Triune Technofab said the financial information the Commerce Department used in a review of boltless steel shelving units from India should be considered a publicly available record, not a private one (Edsal Manufacturing v. United States, CIT # 24-00087).

The following new lawsuits have been filed recently at the Court of International Trade:

Exporter Soc Trang Seafood Joint Stock Co. took to the Court of International Trade on Jan. 24 to challenge the Commerce Department's surrogate value for land rental prices in Vietnam in the countervailing duty investigation on frozen warmwater shrimp from Vietnam (Soc Trang Seafood Joint Stock Co. v. United States, CIT # 25-00030).

Exporter Shanghai Tainai Bearings Co. and importer C&U Americas will appeal a Court of International Trade decision sustaining the Commerce Department's use of neutral facts available against Tainai in the 33rd review of the antidumping duty order on tapered roller bearings from China. The court said Tainai's cooperation in the reviews raised questions about how "aggressively" it sought to gain the cooperation of its unaffiliated suppliers, though these questions didn't translate into the use of adverse facts available (see 2412180036). The court also upheld Commerce's practice of excluding additional revenue Tainai collected in connection with its payment of Section 301 duties from the company's U.S. price (Shanghai Tainai Bearing Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. # 22-00038).

Petitioners led by Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee opposed Jan. 23 the Commerce Department’s continued finding on remand that an Indian frozen shrimp exporter had no reason to think its unbranded home market sales were destined for sale in a third country. Ad Hoc again argued that, based on record evidence, the exporter “knew or should have known” where its products would end up (see 2404160042) (Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee v U.S., CIT Consol. # 23-00202).