The Court of International Trade on Feb. 20 sustained the Commerce Department's remand results in a case on the 2018 review of the countervailing duty order on corrosion-resistant steel products from South Korea. In its remand redetermination, Commerce lowered exporter Hyundai Steel Co.'s CVD rate to a de minimis mark after removing the subsidy attributed to the company's usage rights for the North Incheon Harbor in South Korea (see 2401240062) (Hyundai Steel Co. v. U.S., CIT # 21-00304).
Again remanding the Commerce Department’s final affirmative determination in mattress exporter Zinus Indonesia's antidumping duty case, the Court of International Trade said that facts otherwise available weren't warranted in Commerce's construction of the exporter’s export price and that the department needed to consider new evidence in constructing its selling expenses.
Importer Trijicon's tritium-powered gun sights are "lamps" and not "apparatus," slotting them under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 9405, the Court of International Trade ruled on Feb. 16. Judge Mark Barnett said the gun sights do not meet definition of "apparatus" put forward by either Trijicon or the government, who respectively defined the term as a set of materials or equipment and a complex device. The court instead found that the products "are readily classified as lamps," which are defined as "any of various devices for producing light."
The Court of International Trade on Feb. 20 rejected a Commerce Department scope ruling finding R210-S engines made by Chonging Rato Technology Co. fall within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on vertical shaft engines between 99cc and up to 225cc and parts thereof from China.
Exporter CVB will appeal a January Court of International Trade decision upholding the International Trade Commission's affirmative injury finding on mattresses from a host of countries to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The trade court found various errors in the ITC's assessment of whether the market industry is segmented but nevertheless sustained the injury determination due to the "harmless error" principle (see 2312200070) (CVB v. U.S., CIT # 21-00288).
An importer said that CBP liquidated 227 of its entries at an incorrect 1.02% AD rather than at the proper de minimis rate, then denied its protests and refused refunds despite a correction from Commerce (PNS Clearance v. U.S., CIT #24-00044).
Antidumping duty petitioner Mid Continent Steel & Wire told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that exporter Oman Fasteners' opposition to its bid to stay the appeal is a strategic delay tactic (Oman Fasteners v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1350).
A vehicle accessories exporter's products are “steps bars,” as demonstrated by their usual industry use, designs and marketing, not “side protective attachments,” as the exporter claims, the government said Feb. 16 at the Court of International Trade (Keystone Automotive Operations v. U.S., CIT # 21-00215).
Georgia woman Skeeter-Jo Stoute-Francois filed suit at the Court of International Trade Feb. 16 to contest six questions on the October 2021 customs broker license exam. In her complaint, Stoute-Francois said that after appealing the test results to the Treasury Department, she was left just short of the 75% grade needed to pass the test, failing at 73.75% (Skeeter-Jo Stoute-Francois v. U.S., CIT # 24-00046).
The Court of International Trade on Feb. 20 remanded the Commerce Department's finding that R210-S engines made by Chongqing Rato Technology Co. fall within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on vertical shaft engines between 99cc and up to 225cc from China. Exporter Zhejiang Amerisun Technology Co. argued the R210-S engines have a newly designed horizontal shaft engine outside the orders' scope, while the U.S. said the horizontal shaft engine was equivalent to a modified vertical shaft engine, falling within the orders' scope. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said Commerce's claim that the orders don't include an exhaustive list of the parts needed for an engine to be covered cuts against "well-established legal precedent regarding scope rulings," and that the agency improperly relied on Wikipedia articles -- an "inherently unreliable source."