The Court of International Trade on Nov. 12 held that the deadline for filing a complaint isn't a jurisdictional issue. As a result, Judge Richard Eaton said he had the power to vacate the dismissal of a case from various exporters in an antidumping duty case, which was issued due to the exporters' failure to timely file a complaint.
Petitioner Magnesia Carbon Bricks Fair Trade Committee will appeal a recent Court of International Trade decision upholding the Commerce Department's exclusion of seven types of bricks imported by Fedmet Resources from the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on magnesia carbon bricks from China (see 2510090016). The trade court said the exclusion of the bricks comports with a 2014 U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision, which led to the standard that the addition of any amount of alumina to a magnesia carbon brick excludes it from the orders. The case was filed by Fedmet to contest the scope ruling, which came after a referral in an AD/CVD evasion case, on 11 of Fedmet's brick types. After CIT initially remanded the case to address the CAFC ruling, Commerce said seven of Fedmet's brick types are excluded from the order, since they have a non-zero alumina content (Fedmet Resources v. United States, CIT # 23-00117).
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.
The Commerce Department erred in backing off its use of the Cohen's d test to identify targeted dumping in the middle of an antidumping duty review and introducing a new "two-percent threshold," review respondent Tubos de Acero de Mexico (TAMSA) argued in a Nov. 6 complaint at the Court of International Trade. TAMSA said that while Commerce said it was backing off the d test due to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rejecting the agency's use of the test, the agency didn't have to make a change, since CAFC's decision wasn't "final and conclusive" (Tubos de Acero de Mexico v. United States, CIT # 25-00221).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held oral argument on Nov. 4 in a pair of cases on the International Trade Commission's treatment of business proprietary information in injury proceedings. Judges Timothy Dyk, Richard Taranto and Raymond Chen pressed Courtney McNamara, counsel for the ITC, on the commission's policy of treating questionnaire submissions as confidential; on the Court of International Trade's separate authority to publicize information deemed confidential by the ITC; and on whether notice should be provided to the commission prior to the trade court's exercise of that authority (In Re United States, Fed. Cir. #s 24-1566, 25-127).
The U.S. filed a notice of supplemental authority at the Court of International Trade in a case on an antidumping and countervailing duty injury proceeding in light of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision in Sweet Harvest Foods v. U.S. (NURA USA v. United States, CIT Consol. # 24-00182).
Dominican aluminum extrusions exporter Kingtom Aluminio, which faces a CBP forced labor finding, defended Oct. 31 the Court of International Trade’s decision to vacate the finding pending the conclusion of litigation. It declared that “[i]ts very survival is in jeopardy” due to the finding (Kingtom Aluminio v. United States, CIT # 24-00264).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Oct. 30 issued its mandate in a case on the 2019-20 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on large diameter welded pipe from Greece. Last month, the court said the Commerce Department reasonably used adverse facts available against respondent Corinth Pipeworks Pipe Industry for failing to remedy deficiencies in its cost reconciliation submission (see 2509080027). CAFC said Commerce wasn't required to provide Corinth with an opportunity to comment on the agency's analysis that led to the conclusion that the company's reported costs didn't reconcile with its financial accounting system (Corinth Pipeworks Pipe Industry v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2094).
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.
A group of 44 leading economists, including former Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and four Nobel Prize winners, filed an amicus brief at the Supreme Court on Oct. 23 to contest President Donald Trump's reciprocal tariffs, arguing that the threat underlying the tariffs, sustained trade deficits, don't amount to an "unusual and extraordinary" threat to the U.S. economy, as required by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).