Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
Parties originally excluded from an expedited countervailing duty review on Canadian softwood lumber opposed the government's bid to file a supplemental brief to a status report in a dispute on whether the excluded parties can obtain refunds of CVD cash deposits. The originally excluded parties said the U.S. failed to establish good cause for submitting a reply to the status report (Committee Overseeing Action for Lumber International Trade Investigations or Negotiations v. United States, CIT # 19-00122).
Food supplement exporter BASF filed March 17 in opposition to the U.S.’s cross-motion for judgment in its case. It disagreed with the government’s claim that its products didn’t fit the requirements of BASF’s preferred Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading (BASF Corporation v. United States, CIT Consol. # 12-00422).
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
Citing a lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the U.S. sought March 14 to have dismissed exporter J.D. Irving’s case regarding some of its entries’ cash deposit rate (J.D. Irving v. U.S., CIT #22-00256).
The Commerce Department excluded seven types of bricks imported by Fedmet Resources Corp. from the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on magnesia carbon bricks from China on remand at the Court of International Trade. The agency said, under protest, that the seven brick types had an "above-zero quantity of alumina and were based on testing procedures which properly determined the alumina content at the time of importation" (Fedmet Resources Corp. v. United States, CIT # 23-00117).
A panel of attorneys for importers, domestic petitioners and the government discussed March 13 topics that included the consequences -- or lack thereof -- Loper Bright might have on scope ruling litigation.
Judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit last week questioned the Commerce Department's use of the Cohen's d test in identifying "masked" dumping in the lead case on the use of the test, which returned to the appellate court after its initial remand in 2023. Judges Alan Lourie, William Bryson and Leonard Stark asked counsel for exporter SeAH Steel Corp. if Commerce has a "lot of discretion" in how it uses the test, and they asked the government's attorney if the agency has discretion to use the test even if it's statistically unsound (Stupp Corp. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1663).
The term “butt-weld” is ambiguous, and the Commerce Department was right to find steel branch outlets are covered by an antidumping duty order on butt-weld pipe fittings from China, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled March 6.
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.