The Commerce Department's "practice" cited by an antidumping duty respondent that says that Commerce will not consider new issues after an undefined point in a proceeding "does not actually exist," AD petitioner Wheatland Tube Co. argued in a July 29 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. Wheatland said that Commerce properly used adverse facts available in the contested antidumping duty review to find that respondent Saha Thai Steel Pipe Public Co. was affiliated with various home market customers and that there is no merit to Saha Thai's claims that information submitted by Wheatland to clarify this affiliation information did not comply with Commerce's regulations (Saha Thai Steel Pipe Public Co. Ltd. v. United States, CIT #21-00627).
The International Trade Commission erred in its determination that mattress imports injured the domestic industry and again when it argued in its defense at the Court of International Trade, importer CVB said in an August 1 brief at the Court of International Trade (CVB v. United States, CIT #21-00288).
The Court of International Trade in an Aug. 4 order denied defendant Greenlight Organic and Parambir Singh Aulakh's motion for summary judgment over when the date that customs fraud was discovered for the purpose of finding whether the statute of limitations had ran out. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves ruled that the undisputed facts don't back any of three dates floated by the defendants as the date that the U.S. first received evidence of Greenlight's double invoicing scheme. In the scheme, Greenlight is accused of fraudulently misclassifying its Vietnam-origin knit garments. Choe-Groves ordered all parties to file a joint proposed pre-trial order.
The pay.gov system used by the Court of International Trade will undergo maintenance Aug. 6, 6 p.m. to 10 p.m. EDT. Documents that require payment through this system cannot be filed on CM/ECF during this time.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade in an Aug. 1 order granted the U.S.'s motion to stay a consolidated case contesting an antidumping and countervailing duty evasion case after the plaintiffs, led by Dominican manufacturer Kingtom Aluminio, backed off their opposition to the stay. The plaintiffs did so after CBP flipped its evasion finding on importers Global Aluminum Distributor and Hialeah Aluminum Supply. In the Global Aluminum Distributor case, CBP said it no longer believes the importers evaded the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China by transshipping them through Kingtom in the Dominican Republic (see 2206150047). In Kingtom's two cases, the U.S. requested a stay until the court sorts out the Global Aluminum case. The stay was granted with Judge Richard Easton ordering the parties to confer and jointly submit a status report and a proposed briefing schedule 14 days from the date judgment is entered in the Global Aluminum Distributor case (Kingtom Aluminio v. United States, CIT Consol. #22-00072).
Various models of uninterruptable power supplies and surge voltage protectors were substantially transformed by manufacturing operations in the Philippines and should be required to be marked as "Products of China," Cyber Power Systems said in an Aug. 1 motion at the Court of International Trade (Cyber Power Systems v. U.S., CIT #20-00124).
The Commerce Department dropped its finding that a particular market situation distorted the price of a key input of circular welded non-alloy steel pipe, in Aug. 2 remand results submitted to the Court of International Trade in an antidumping duty case. Prior to this remand, Commerce had already dropped the PMS adjustment to one of the antidumping duty review's mandatory respondents but not the other. On remand for the fourth time in the action, the agency dropped the PMS adjustment for the remaining respondent, dropping non-selected respondent SeAH Steel Corp.'s dumping rate from 19.28% to 9.77% (Hyundai Steel Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. #18-00154).
The Commerce Department added certain service-related revenues in antidumping duty respondent Nippon Steel's U.S. price in voluntarily requested remand results, dropping the exporter's dumping margin from 11.70% to 10.12%. Agreeing it "inadvertently" left three service-related expenses out of its calculations of Nippon Steel's U.S. price, Commerce requested the voluntary remand, including them in the price calculations. Nippon Steel still took issue with Commerce's draft revision, prompting the agency to make further revisions to the calculation of the net price used in the differential pricing test and the revenue for the constructed export price (CEP) profit rate (Nippon Steel v. U.S., CIT #21-00533).
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.