The Court of International Trade sustained in part and remanded in part the Commerce Department's second remand results in a case over the antidumping duty administrative review of passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China in a Sept. 24 order. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves found that Commerce's denial of separate rate status to Pirelli Tyre Co. during the first ten months of the review period was unreasonable, because the company was not Chinese government-controlled for that part of the period of review. Choe-Groves also sustained Commerce's decision to drop a downward adjustment for irrecoverable value-added tax to mandatory respondent Qingdao Sentury Tire Co.'s export price.
Court of International Trade activity
A company challenging CBP's finding that it evaded antidumping and countervailing duties on xanthan gum should have its lawsuit tossed because it failed to appeal CBP's denial of its protest on the relevant entries, even though the importer filed its case under CIT's Section 1581(c) jurisdiction, which covers AD/CVD proceedings, the Department of Justice said in a Sept. 22 reply brief at the Court of International Trade (All One God Faith, Inc., et al. v. United States, CIT #20-00164).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade sustained the International Trade Commission's final negative injury determination in its antidumping and countervailing duty investigation of fabricated structural steel from Canada, China and Mexico, in a Sept. 22 confidential opinion. Judge Claire Kelly handed down the result, and plans to publish the public opinion on Sept. 30, she said in a letter to the litigants. The parties have until Sept. 29 to review information that's not already bracketed that should be bracketed and the already-bracketed information to make sure no confidential information is released to the public (Full Member Subgroup of the American Institute of Steel Construction, LLC v. United States, CIT #20-00090).
The International Trade Commission ignored that the domestic tire industry was profitable when it made its determination that passenger vehicle and light truck tires from South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam were harming the domestic industry, plaintiffs led by Sentury Tire (Thailand) Co. said in a Sept. 17 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Sentury also argued that the commission failed to properly consider the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the domestic industry (Sentury Tire (Thailand) Co. Ltd., et al. v. United States, CIT #21-00439).
Untethering the six-year statute of limitations for customs bonds from the date an entry is liquidated would impair the ability of customs sureties to function, and CBP’s attempt to collect on a bond issued by Aegis Security Insurance eight years after liquidation is an unreasonable delay that would cause real harm to the surety, Aegis said in a brief filed Sept. 16 at the Court of International Trade.
The Court of International Trade remanded the Commerce Department's final results in an antidumping duty administrative review that made a particular market situation adjustment to the cost of production in a sales-below-cost test in a Sept. 23 order. Judge Gary Katzmann said that the statute does not permit PMS adjustment to sales-below-cost tests when calculating normal value. The ruling came in a case brought by mandatory respondents HiSteel and Kukje, which challenged an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on heavy walled rectangular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from South Korea.
The Commerce Department's mandatory respondent selection process in a countervailing duty case on wood flooring resembled "Russian roulette" due to fundamental errors in the CBP data used to make the respondent picks, plaintiffs in a case at the Court of International Trade said in four briefs (Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co., Ltd., et al. v. United States, CIT Consol. #20-03885).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Commerce Department violated the law when it found that antidumping duty review respondent BlueScope Steel Pty did not reimburse its U.S. affiliate, BlueScope Steel Americas (BSA), for antidumping duties, U.S. Steel Corp. said in a Sept. 20 complaint at the Court of International Trade. The agency failed to consider evidence provided by U.S. Steel that detracts from the agency's conclusion and failed to provide a reasoned explanation that reimbursement was not occurring, the steel giant said (United States Steel Corporation v. United States, CIT #21-00528).