Antidumping petitioner Mid Continent Steel & Wire will appeal a January Court of International Trade decision sustaining the sixth AD review of steel nails from Oman in which the Commerce Department dropped its use of adverse facts available against exporter Oman Fasteners (see 2401050018). As stated in a notice of appeal, the petitioner will take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The notice of appeal was filed before a public version of the trade court's decision was released (Oman Fasteners v. U.S., CIT # 22-00348).
Parties in a case on the 2020 countervailing duty review on steel concrete reinforcing bar from Turkey disagreed on the impact of the Court of International Trade's ruling in a separate suit concerning the 2018 review of the same CVD order. Filing a joint status report to the trade court on Jan. 8, the U.S. and exporter Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret said no consensus has been reached and "none of the parties have changed their position," though Kaptan said the court's decision "dictates the outcome of this proceeding given virtually identical facts" (Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret v. United States, CIT # 22-00149).
The Commerce Department was wrong to equate captive power industries and utilities in its determination that an Indian aluminum exporter had received coal for less-than-adequate remuneration, the exporter said Jan. 5 in the Court of International Trade (Hindalco Industries Limited v. U.S., CIT # 23-00260)
CBP incorrectly claims it liquidated an entry of tire cord quality wire rods prior to telling the importer multiple times that the entry was suspended, Kiswire said Jan. 5 at the Court of International Trade (Kiswire Inc. v. U.S., CIT #22-00181).
The Court of International Trade in a Jan. 8 text-only order denied Florida man Zhe "John" Liu's motion to amend the protective order in a customs penalty case against Liu and his company GL Paper Distribution. The U.S. said the motion was another attempt to get around the limits of discovery in a separate criminal proceeding against Liu (United States v. Zhe "John" Liu, CIT # 22-00215).
The Commerce Department on remand altered its analysis on whether an additional allotment of traceable carbon emissions credits in South Korea constituted a financial contribution. Submitting remand results to the Court of International Trade on Jan. 5, Commerce said that the South Korean government's decision to distribute additional free allowances of carbon emissions credits constitutes a "direct transfer of funds," rather than revenue forgone by the foreign government (Hyundai Steel Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00170).
The Court of International Trade in a Jan. 8 opinion rejected a motion from the U.S. seeking to retract the court's public opinion sustaining an affirmative injury finding from the International Trade Commission and to bracket information the government said was confidential. Touting the need for transparency in the court system, Judge Stephen Vaden said that the information the government sought to redact -- certain company names and numerical approximations -- is not confidential because the ITC failed to properly bracket it during litigation or the information is publicly available. The judge noted that neither "administrative agencies nor this Court can hide from scrutiny by censoring information," adding that only "truly confidential" information may be hidden from the public.
The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Jan. 5 granted a motion to dismiss an appeal of a countervailing duty suit from the U.S. and petitioner Nucor Corp. The court lifted the stay in the case and dismissed the case after also considering the "non-participation" of exporters POSCO and Hyundai Steel Co. and the South Korean government (POSCO v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-1576).
The Court of International Trade on Jan. 5 issued a confidential opinion sustaining the sixth antidumping duty review on steel nails from Oman. Oman Fasteners brought suit to contest the Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available against the exporter for supposedly failing to submit all of its responses to Commerce's supplemental questionnaire by the deadline (Oman Fasteners v. U.S., CIT # 22-00348).