The Court of International Trade will be closed Jan. 9 in observance of the national day of mourning for the late President Jimmy Carter, the court announced. The day will be considered a "legal holiday" for the purposes of computing time and motions to enlarge time under the court's Rule 6.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
After a remand, the Commerce Department continued to find the downstream products of Mexican pipe exporter Maquilacero S.A. de C.V. and auto-parts manufacturer Tecnicas de Fluidos S.A. de C.V. (TEFLU) were covered by an antidumping duty order on light-walled rectangular pipe and tube (Maquilacero S.A. de C.V. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 23-00091).
The International Trade Commission erred when it found that aluminum extrusion exports from 14 nations didn't injure the U.S. industry, AD/CVD petitioners the U.S. Aluminum Extruders Coalition and the United Steelworkers argued in a Jan. 3 complaint at the Court of International Trade. The seven-count complaint challenged, among other things, the commission's conclusions that the extrusions didn't undersell the domestic like product nor have "significant adverse price effects" (U.S. Aluminum Extruders Coalition v. United States, CIT # 25-00001)
Antidumping petitioner Coalition of American Manufacturers of Mobile Access Equipment took to the Court of International Trade on Jan. 3 to challenge the Commerce Department's surrogate value picks in the 2022-23 review of the antidumping duty order on mobile access equipment from China. The petitioner filed a 12-count complaint to contest 12 different surrogate data picks (Coalition of American Manufacturers of Mobile Access Equipment v. United States, CIT # 24-00219).
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Jan. 3 on AD/CVD proceedings:
Court of International Trade Judge Claire Kelly on Jan. 2 granted a motion to consolidate two cases challenging the Commerce Department’s refusal to grant several Chinese pea protein exporters separate rates in an antidumping duty investigation (Yantai Oriental Protein Tech Co. v. United States, CIT # 24-00181, -00179).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Dec. 31 denied Canadian lumber exporter J.D. Irving's bid for a full court rehearing of a three-judge panel's rejection of the company's attempt to challenge the denial of an antidumping duty cash deposit rate under Section 1581(i) (J.D. Irving v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1652).
Exporter Saha Thai Steel Pipe Public Co. petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this month to hear its antidumping duty scope case. The petition cast the lower court's decision sustaining the inclusion of its production in the scope of the AD order on circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Thailand as a failure to apply the high court's recent decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which eliminated the principle of deferring to agencies' interpretations of ambiguous statutes (Saha Thai Steel Pipe Public Co. v. Wheatland Tube Co., Sup. Ct. 24-696).
The Court of International Trade sent back the Commerce Department's determination in a covered merchandise referral to exclude certain carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings made from Chinese fittings that underwent production in Vietnam from the scope of the antidumping duty order on carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings from China. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves remanded Commerce's consideration of various (k)(1) sources, including a circumvention finding that took a contrary position.