A solar panel exporter again argued that the Commerce Department had instituted a double remedy by adjusting Trina Solar’s U.S. prices for the countervailing duties it paid for only five subsidy programs, and not the other six, in its review of antidumping and countervailing duty orders on solar panels from China (Trina Solar v. U.S., CIT # 23-00213).

The Commerce Department was right to consider the assembly of hardwood plywood in Vietnam “minor and insignificant” when it reached an affirmative circumvention ruling for 20 Vietnamese exporters, the U.S. said July 2 in response to importers’ and exporters’ multiple motions for judgment (see 2404020054) and 2402020054) (Shelter Forest International Acquisition v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 23-00144).

The U.S. on July 1 claimed that the provision of customs law establishing deemed liquidation except where the determinations of admissibility are vested in an agency other than CBP "broadly applies" to all agencies that can make admissibility determinations and not just those capable of carrying them out (Inspired Ventures v. U.S., CIT # 24-00062).

A Cambodian solar cell exporter became the latest (see 2407010059 and 2406140059) to claim in a motion for judgment that Commerce wrongly elevated the importance of an exporter’s regional research and development in a circumvention investigation (BYD (H.K.) Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00221).

Antidumping duty petitioner Ventura Coastal invoked the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Loper Bright v. Raimondo -- which overturned the principle of Chevron deference -- to claim that the Court of International Trade doesn't need to adhere to the Commerce Department's interpretation of the statute "defining affiliation between parties" (Ventura Coastal v. U.S., CIT # 23-00009).

Correction: A complaint filed by the Turkish rebar exporter Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi challenging the Commerce Department's 2021 countervailing duty review on rebar from Turkey was in Court of International Trade case number 24-00096 (see 2407010038).

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

The U.S. will appeal a Court of International Trade decision finding that importer Fraserview Remanufacturing Inc. didn't need a protest to file suit at the trade court for its entries that were erroneously deemed liquidated while liquidation was suspended (see 2401250039). The court said that because the statute for deemed liquidation requires that the entries not be suspended, CBP's notices of deemed liquidation didn't operate to actually liquidate the entries. The government on July 1 said it will take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Fraserview Remanufacturing Inc. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00244).

Exporter Sahamitr Pressure Container will appeal a May Court of International Trade decision sustaining the Commerce Department's recalculation of exporter Sahamitr's sales expenses in the 2019-20 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on steel propane cylinders from Thailand (see 2405020029). The court said that Sahamitr failed to undermine Commerce's finding that the company's monthly-based calculation of its sales costs were distortive. The exporter said on July 1 that it will take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Sahamitr Pressure Container v. U.S., CIT # 22-00107).

The Commerce Department wrongly used data of producers of “similar,” not “identical,” products when constructing a respondent’s value in an antidumping duty review on forged steel fluid end blocks from Italy, a petitioner said June 28 (Ellwood City Forge Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00191).