The Court of International Trade rejected U.S. Steel Corp.'s bid to redact portions of the court's recent decision remanding 31 Section 232 exclusion requests. Judge M. Miller Baker said a showing of good cause alone isn't enough to shield discovery materials after they have been introduced at trial or submitted "in connection with dispositive motions," noting the need for transparency in the judicial system and presumption of public access to court proceedings.
The Commerce Department failed to consider whether U.S. Steel Corp. had the capacity to fill the aggregate of importer California Steel Industries' Section 232 steel tariff exclusion requests as opposed to just assessing whether U.S. Steel could fill all of them individually, the Court of International Trade held on Nov. 13. Judge M. Miller Baker added that Commerce didn't address its concession that it couldn't timely supply more slab than contracted for with California Steel.
Court of International Trade Judge Gary Katzmann again remanded parts of the Commerce Department remand results on the eighth administrative review of the antidumping duty order on xanthan gum from China. He also granted in part a U.S. motion to dismiss in his Dec. 16 decision.
Court of International Trade Judge Thomas Aquilino upheld the Commerce Department’s redetermination on remand that set at 26.05% the antidumping rate for exporter LG Chem’s superabsorbent polymers. On remand, the department switched back to a model match methodology it had used for the review’s preliminary redetermination, saying not enough evidence on the record supported the one used in its final determination (The Ad Hoc Coalition of American SAP Producers v. U.S., CIT # 23-00010).
The Court of International Trade in a decision made public Dec. 17 sustained in part and remanded in part the Commerce Department's 2021 review of the countervailing duty order on cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate from South Korea. Judge Claire Kelly sent back Commerce's finding of de facto specificity regarding the Korean government's alleged provision of electricity for less than adequate remuneration, holding that the agency failed to give an explanation for its finding that the benefit received by a "group of entities and industries it identifies is disproportionate." However, the judge upheld Commerce's refusal to accept the 2021 cost information from the state electricity company, KEPCO, as being untimely filed.
The Commerce Department ignored court precedent when it found magnesia carbon bricks from China that contained alumina were subject to antidumping and countervailing duties, the Court of International Trade said in a decision issued Dec. 12.
A three-judge panel at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit told the Court of International Trade that it has now twice wrongly told an importer that its first-sale price method to determine the duty level of its cookware was prohibited.
The Court of International Trade in a decision made public Dec. 13 remanded the Commerce Department's rejection of 31 of importer California Steel Industries' Section 232 exclusion requests. Judge M. Miller Baker found that Commerce failed to consider whether objector U.S. Steel Corp. could supply the entire amount of slab represented across all 31 exclusions as opposed to just the slab covered by one exclusion request. However, Baker sustained Commerce's rejection of another 14 exclusion requests from California Steel, finding that the agency reasonably found U.S. Steel could timely provide slab to the importer in a sufficient quantity.
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 16 remanded the Commerce Department's decision to include importer Hardware Resources' edge-glued boards in the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on wood mouldings and millwork products from China. In his first decision since joining the court, Judge Joseph Laroski held that Commerce failed to consider whether Hardware Resources' products were, in fact, mouldings or millwork products under the orders' plain language.
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 16 remanded the Commerce Department’s classification of xanthan gum exporter Fufeng’s coal and its direct calculation of the exporter’s energy costs. Judge Gary Katzmann dismissed the exporter’s challenge to the Cohen’s d test and to the department’s decision to subtract Section 301 tariffs from the Fufeng’s value calculation (Neimenggu Fufeng Biotechnologies Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00068).