The Court of International Trade improperly relied on an adverse inference in rejecting importer Meyer Corp.'s claim for first sale treatment related to the valuation of its cookware imports, Meyer told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a Sept. 21 reply brief. Meyer claimed that the trade court's inference, which the importer said is the "centerpiece" of the U.S. defense, is based solely on "pure speculation" and shows that the court committed "clear error" (Meyer Corp. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1570).
The Commerce Department erred on remand when it stuck by its benchmark picks for the land program and the aluminum plate, sheet and strip program in a lawsuit on the 2016-17 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on aluminum foil from China, Chinese aluminum exporter Zhongji said in its Sept. 18 remand comments to the Court of International Trade (Jiangsu Zhongji Lamination Materials Co. v. U.S., CIT # 21-00133).
The Commerce Department mistakenly relied on the invoice dates rather than contract dates as dates of U.S. sales, resulting in a miscalculation of duties in the 2020-2021 antidumping duty review on steel concrete reinforcing bar from Turkey, Turkish rebar exporters Kaptan and Colakoglu said in a Sept. 18 brief at the Court of International Trade. The brief came in support of a motion for judgment, which asked the court to remand the case to Commerce for reconsideration of the date of sale for U.S. sales and recalculation of the antidumping rates (Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi Ve Ticaret v. U.S., CIT # 23-00059).
The Court of International Trade in a Sept. 20 opinion dismissed a customs penalty case involving surety company Lincoln General Insurance Co. The company filed a joint motion to dismiss with the U.S. in the case, as well as in 10 other similar matters, telling the court that the parties reached an understanding regarding "priority classification that enabled [CBP] to request that the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania approve the United States' claim" as "undisputed and resolved" (see 2309200038). Judge Jane Restani granted the motion to dismiss.
The Commerce Department lawfully selected surrogate values, calculated rates, applied adverse facts, and correctly decided to deny a separate rate to exporter Trina during the eighth administrative review of the antidumping duty order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells from China, the American Alliance for Solar Manufacturing said in its Sept. 18 brief at the Court of International Trade (Jinko Solar Import and Export Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00219).
The Court of International Trade on Sept. 21 ruled in a customs classification case involving eight different categories of decorative plant parts, siding with importer Second Nature Designs on its preferred classification of two of the categories and with the government on one of the categories. Pertaining to three other categories, Judge Gary Katzmann said that there were fact questions remaining, leading the judge to deny summary judgment and advance litigation to its "second phase."
The Court of International Trade in a Sept. 21 opinion granted parts and denied parts of importer Second Nature Designs' motion for judgment in a customs case on decorative items of plant parts. Judge Gary Katzmann said he agreed with Second Nature that "certain categories" of the imports should be classified as "dried items and curled items" under subheading 0604.90.30, free of duty. But for other categories, the court sided with the government's classification as "artificial flowers or fruit" under 0604.90.60, dutiable at 7%. Factual issues plague the remaining categories, the judge said, denying motion for summary judgment on those goods.
The Court of International Trade on Sept. 20 upheld the Commerce Department's decision on remand to include importer SMA Surface's Twilight product within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on quartz surface products from China. Judge Gary Katzmann said that SMA Surfaces waived its challenge to the remand, which said the product doesn't qualify for the crushed glass surface product exclusion, by failing to present developed arguments in response to the remand decision.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Commerce Department lawfully selected surrogate values, calculated rates, applied adverse facts, and correctly decided to deny a separate rate to Trina during its eighth administrative review of the antidumping duty order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells from China, DOJ told the Court of International Trade in a Sept. 18 reply (Jinko Solar Import and Export Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00219).