Judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit questioned antidumping duty petitioner Wheatland Tube Co. and respondent Saha Thai Steel Pipe Public Co. during a Nov. 7 oral argument over Wheatland's claim that a Commerce Department scope ruling improperly excluded dual-stenciled pipe from the AD order on circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Thailand (Saha Thai Steel Pipe Public Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-2181).
Court of Federal Appeals Trade activity
The Commerce Department added another respondent to the 2016-17 review of the antidumping duty order on passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said the agency couldn't limit the review to one mandatory respondent. Tapping exporter Kenda Rubber (China) Co. in its remand results, Commerce calculated an 18.15% dumping margin for the exporter, also leading to a recalculation of the separate AD rate, which now sits at 41.36%, down from 64.57%. The China-wide rate held steady at 87.99% (YC Rubber Co. (North America) v. United States, CIT # 19-000069).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a text-only order granted a motion to extend time to file an opening brief from exporters Double Coin Holdings and China Manufacturers Alliance in a case involving a review of the antidumping duty order on off-the-road tires from China. The exporters now have until Nov. 28 to file the opening brief in a case whin ich the Court of International Trade upheld the Commerce Department's decision to assign Double Coin the 105.31% China-wide dumping rate due to the company's failure to rebut the presumption of Chinese state control over its export activities (see 2307200020) (China Manufacturers Alliance v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2391).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its mandate Oct. 30 in a case on the International Trade Commission's negative injury determination on fabricated structural steel from China. The appellate court said the ITC didn't err by declining to resolve an alleged ambiguity in the definition of the domestic like product scope (see 2309070058). The court added that nothing in the record showed the ITC declined to address the issue, adding that the commission didn't violate the law by deciding that the captive production exception isn't applicable and finding no significant price effects from the imports (Full Member Subgroup of the American Institute of Steel Construction v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-1176).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Oct. 31 ordered the clerk of the Court of International Trade to transfer samples of pipe conduit to the appellate court in a customs case on importer Shamrock Building Materials' electrical conduit entries. In the case, the trade court said the conduits cannot insulate the base metal from the electrical current or the heat in the wire it surrounds, barring classification under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 8547. Shamrock is now arguing at the Federal Circuit that the heading, which covers "electric conduit tubing lined with insulating material," is the proper home for the goods (see 2309250037). The appellate court said the pipe conduit samples "may aid the court in its understanding of the issues in this case" (Shamrock Building Materials v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1648).
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 U.S. asked for a voluntary remand at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in an Enforce and Protect Act case to discuss the legal effects of the Royal Brush Manufacturing v. U.S. decision. In Royal Brush, the appellate court said CBP violated an EAPA respondent's due process rights by not granting it access to the business confidential information in the proceeding (see 2307270038). Importer Skyview Cabinet USA consented to the motion, while the petitioner, MasterBrand Cabinets, took no position (Skyview Cabinet USA v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-2318).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in an Oct. 26 order granted a two-week extension for exporter Tau-Ken Temir and Kazakhstan's Ministry of Trade and Integration to file their reply brief in a case on the countervailing duty investigation on silicon metal from Kazakhstan. TKT and the trade ministry recently also asked the court for an additional 7,000 words in the reply brief, prompting the court to stay briefing until it can resolve the motion for the expanded word count (Tau-Ken Temir v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-2204).
The U.S. asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for approval to use 3,000 more words in its reply brief in a case on the use of the Cohen's d test to root out "masked" dumping. The government said each of the three issues raised in the case is "complex and technical in nature." It said they cover two accounting issues and the intricacies of a statistical method, creating "good cause" for the additional words (Marmen v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1877).
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Judges Kimberly Moore, Sharon Prost and Richard Taranto's motion for the establishment of a dispute resolution process in Judge Pauline Newman's suit against the three judges' fitness investigation on the 96-year-old judge. The D.C. court said in the text-only order that the parties are to contact Chief Circuit Mediator Robert Frost for further directions on establishing the dispute resolution procedure (The Hon. Pauline Newman v. The Hon. Kimberly A. Moore, D.D.C. # 23-01334).