The Court of International Trade in a May 19 opinion made public May 27 again rejected the Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available over the subsidy rate for China's Export Buyer's Credit Program in a countervailing duty investigation. Judge Richard Eaton ruled that Commerce did not support its position that certain information was necessary to verify that CVD respondent Zhejiang Junyue Standard Part Co.'s U.S. customers used the program. The judge also ruled that the agency did not adequately explain its decision to triple the subsidy rate over the EBCP to account for Junyue and two of its affiliates.
The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's remand results in an antidumping case and a countervailing duty case both brought by exporter Celik Halat after the agency accepted submissions made just minutes late. Judge Timothy Stanceu upheld the agency's remand findings after Commerce accepted the submissions it initially rejected for being late -- a move dubbed a "draconian penalty" by Stanceu.
The Court of International Trade in a May 26 order denied the U.S.'s stay bid in an antidumping case, citing harm to plaintiff and exporter Building Systems de Mexico (BSM) that could result from the stay. Judge Claire Kelly ruled that "a stay is not appropriate in this case," given that BSM has already successfully challenged four bases for the Commerce Department's finding of dumping and a stay "would significantly devalue" the company's investment in the challenge.
Elisa Solomon appeared in a customs case representing the U.S. government, as lead attorney of record in the action brought by importer Mast Industries over the classification of ladies' knitted tops with a built-in shelf bra (see 2205020058). According to her LinkedIn page, Solomon joined DOJ in March after six and half years at Covington (Mast Industries v. U.S., CIT #04-00274).
The U.S. will appeal a March Court of International Trade case that found CBP can't pursue unpaid duties from identity theft victims due to the statute of limitations. Per the May 25 notice of appeal, DOJ is taking the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The trade court opinion tossed a case brought by the U.S. seeking to collect over $5.7 million in unpaid duties from Katana Racing on 386 entries of passenger and light truck tires from China that Katana said were the result of identity theft (see 2203280047). The judge said Katana was allowed to revoke an earlier statute of limitations waiver and that without the waiver, any action by CBP is barred by the passage of time (United States v. Katana Racing d/b/a Wheel & Tire Distributors, CIT #19-00125).
The Court of International Trade in a May 19 opinion made public May 27 sent back the Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available over alleged subsidies stemming from China's Export Buyer's Credit Program in a countervailing duty investigation. Judge Richard Eaton said that not enough evidence backs Commerce's use of AFA to find that the plaintiffs, led by Zhejiang Junyue Standard Part Co., benefitted from the EBCP. In the investigation, Commerce also tripled the subsidy rate for the program to account for benefits received by Junyue and two of its affiliates. Eaton remanded this as well, finding that this move "has not been explained adequately."
The Court of International Trade in two May 26 orders sustained the Commerce Department's remand results in an antidumping case and a countervailing duty case, both brought by Turkish exporter Celik Halat. The cases contested the Commerce Department's decision to reject minutes-late submissions. Following a remand, the agency accepted the submissions, resulting in lowered AD/CVD rates for Celik Halat and the ultimate acceptance of the remand by the trade court.
The Court of International Trade in a May 26 order denied the U.S.' motion for a stay in an antidumping case. The case, brought by exporter Building Systems de Mexico, contests the less-than-fair-value investigation into fabricated structural steel from Mexico. The U.S. requested a stay until the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issues a decision in an appeal of the International Trade Commission's negative injury determination on the steel from China. Judge Claire Kelly said that "a stay is not appropriate in this case" since BSM could be harmed by a stay order. The exporter has already successfully challenged four of the Commerce Department's bases for finding dumping, and a stay would "significantly devalue" its investment in challenging the finding of dumping needed for an AD order, she said.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Korean steel producer Nexteel filed a complaint May 25 with the Court of International Trade over alleged errors in calculating antidumping duty rates during an administrative review on oil tubular goods from Korea. In it, Nexteel, a non-individually examined separate rate company, challenges the rate Commerce calculated for Hyundai Steel that resulted in a higher average rate assigned to Nexteel and the other 29 non-individually investigated respondents (Nexteel Co., Ltd v. United States, CIT No. 22-00140).