The Court of International Trade in a May 23 opinion sent back the CBP's position that Minh Phu Seafood Joint Stock Co. didn't evade the antidumping duties on frozen warmwater shrimp from India. Judge Claire Kelly ruled that a remand is needed since CBP didn't review the entire record in the Enforce and Protect Act case and that it is unclear how CBP enforced compliance with the need to provide public summaries of confidential information. Kelly also denied defendant-intervenors Minh Phu's and MSeafood Corp.'s motion for supplemental briefing which argued that it only became aware of deficiencies in the record at oral argument.
The Court of International Trade ruled in a May 20 opinion that sales from a Canadian warehouse to U.S. customers are "sales for export to the U.S." rather than "domestic sales," in a May 20 slip opinion by Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves. The opinion granted a Nov. 19 motion for summary judgment by DOJ (see 2111220057) that argued plaintiff Midwest-CBK's sales were exports to the U.S. at the time of sale (Midwest-CBK, LLC v. United States, CIT Consol. #17-00154).
A CBP stay request in a lawsuit challenging an Enforce and Protect Act evasion determination while the agency seeks a covered merchandise referral from Commerce amounts to a delay tactic to extend enforcement in a losing action, Fedmet said in a May 18 motion asking the Court of International Trade to deny the stay (Fedmet Resources Corporation v. United States, CIT #21-00248).
The Commerce Department fully addressed the Court of International Trade's questions about why the agency needs certain information from the Chinese government in order to verify that certain exporters' U.S. customers did not use the Export Buyer's Credit Program, a countervailing duty petitioner argued in May 19 comments supporting Commerce's remand. The petitioner, United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers Union, AFL-CIO, said that the "only reasonable way" for Commerce to pursue verification of non-use of the EBCP is through this requested information, so the Chinese government not providing it stands as reasonable grounds for the use of adverse facts available (Cooper (Kunshan) Tire Co. v. United States, CIT #20-00113).
The Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security continued to deny 15 Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion requests from NLMK Pennsylvania in remand results at the Court of International Trade on May 18. BIS said that the U.S. industry has sufficient capacity to make the products that NLMK requested the exclusions for at a "satisfactory quality" (NLMK Pennsylvania v. United States, CIT #21-00507).
The Court of International Trade in a May 19 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's remand results in an antidumping duty case, finding that exporter Pirelli Tyre wasn't controlled by the Chinese state for the first 10 months of the AD review. Ten months into the review, Chinese company Chem China bought Pirelli, but Commerce originally held that Pirelli was owned by the Chinese government for the entire review. On remand, the agency said Chem China didn't own Pirelli for the first 10 months, giving the exporter a 1.45% dumping rate for this period.
The Commerce Department sufficiently backed its position that electricity subsidies in China were regionally specific, the Court of International Trade said in a May 19 opinion in a countervailing duty review challenge. Addressing the four other previously remanded elements of the review, Judge Jane Restani ultimately upheld Commerce's remand.
The Court of International Trade in a May 20 opinion denied the right to intervene in a countervailing duty case for the Committee Overseeing Action for Lumber International Trade Investigations or Negotiations. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves ruled that the coalition does not have a right to intervene in the action since it has not shown it has a "direct, immediate, or legally protectable interest in this case" or that the U.S. will not adequately represent its interests. The judge also said that it will not let the coalition intervene since it fails to show that it shares a defense to plaintiff GreenFirst's claims since it doesn't sufficiently allege that it will be adversely affected by a decision in the case. GreenFirst filed the case to contest the Commerce Department's decision to not start a changed circumstances review of the CVD order on softwood lumber from Canada.
The Court of International Trade in a May 12 opinion made public May 20 remanded the Commerce Department's final determination in the countervailing duty investigation on wood cabinets and vanities from China. The plaintiffs, led by Dalian Meisen Woodworking Co., challenged Commerce's use of adverse facts available on China's Export Buyer's Credit Program and the agency's use of a different plywood benchmark for different companies despite the fact that the companies used the same types of plywood.
The Court of International Trade in a May 20 opinion sided with the U.S. in finding sales of goods warehoused in Canada to U.S. customers were not "domestic sales" but actually sales "for exportation to the U.S." for valuation purposes. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves held that "undisputed evidence" shows that plaintiff Midwest-CBK's sales were exports to the U.S. at the time of sale. The judge also ruled that CBP's extensions of the liquidation deadlines were lawful and that the entries should not be deemed liquidated since CBP had a valid reason to extend the liquidation deadline. As a result of the opinion, the case now moves to phase two to tackle the remaining issues including the proper method for valuing the merchandise at issue.