The Court of International Trade properly said that importer Nature's Touch Frozen Foods frozen fruit mixture entries are classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 0811.90.80 as "Fruit ... frozen," the U.S. told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a Nov. 21 reply brief. The trade court "committed no legal error in interpreting" the terms "fruit," "other" and "food preparations" since the terms are defined by "dictionaries, Explanatory Notes, and legal standards" set by the Federal Circuit and other courts, the government said (Nature's Touch Frozen Foods (West) v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2093).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit "unequivocally held" that the Commerce Department could deduct Section 232 national security duties from U.S. price in antidumping duty cases, the U.S. argued in a Nov. 17 supplemental brief at the Court of International Trade.
The Court of International Trade in a Nov. 27 opinion sustained the Commerce Department's remand results finding that ship building company Nur Gemicilik ve Tic, an affiliate of countervailing duty respondent Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret, is not a cross-owned input supplier of Kaptan's. Judge Gary Katzmann called Commerce's characterization of Nur's steel scrap as not necessarily primarily dedicated to Kaptan's production of rebar lawful and said the agency properly considered Nur's business activity as a factor in its primarily dedicated inquiry. The court held there is no past Commerce practice where the agency treats steel scrap as a primarily dedicated input of rebar.
The Court of International Trade in a Nov. 22 opinion sustained the Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available against exporter Kumar Industries in the first administrative review of the antidumping duty order on glycine from India. Judge Timothy Stanceu said Kumar's "inadequate explanations' related to income-tax-related documentation for one of the limited partnership's partners did not allow Commerce to conduct its affiliation analysis pertaining to Kumar and two unnamed companies. The record lacked the needed information to "reconcile the record evidence" of the partner's ownership interest in the unnamed companies with conflicting information present in the "draft computation" Kumar submitted for the partner.
American tool maker Stanley Black & Decker moved to toss its case challenging President Donald Trump's expansion of Section 232 steel and aluminum duties onto "derivative" products after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the move in a separate case from PrimeSource Building Products. Stanley Black & Decker said it's "no longer necessary for" the Court of International Trade to render a decision in the case, which has been stayed pending resolution of PrimeSource's case. The tool maker moved to toss the case despite a second petition at the Supreme Court from exporter Oman Fasteners (see 2311010052). The trade court granted the motion to dismiss the same day (Stanley Black & Decker v. U.S., CIT # 21-00262).
The Commerce Department rejected arguments from antidumping duty petitioners, led by Ellwood City Forge Co., regarding "alternative pathways" for the agency to make a particular market situation adjustment for two inputs of forged steel fluid end blocks from Germany. Submitting its remand results to the Court of International Trade on Nov. 21, Commerce said that while it reversed course on its ability to make a cost-based PMS adjustment, it won't be able to make a sales-based PMS adjustment since it was untimely filed (Ellwood City Forge Co. v. United States, CIT # 21-00077).
Importer Amsted Rail Co. and its Mexican maquiladora affiliate ASF-K Mexico returned a conflict of interest suit against their former counsel, Buchanan Ingersoll partner Daniel Pickard to the Court of International Trade. Filing another complaint at the trade court after previous claims against the Buchanan partner fell short for jurisdictional reasons, ARC said Pickard "betrayed" the company by using its information against it in an injury petition on freight rail couplers from Mexico and China (Amsted Rail Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00242).
The Court of International Trade in a confidential Nov. 21 opinion remanded parts and sustained parts of the Commerce Department's remand results in a case on the antidumping duty investigation on biodiesel from Indonesia. In a letter to litigants, Judge Richard Eaton gave the parties until Nov. 30 to review the confidential information in the opinion, stating it's the court's intention to release a public version of the opinion "in the near future." In a previous opinion in the case, the court remanded Commerce's reliance on constructed value for sales not made through Indonesia's Public Service Obligation,saying it needed to be further explained (see 2207050064). The court also told Commerce to further explain its legal authority to make a CV adjustment to account for Renewable Identification Numbers (Wilmar Trading Pte Ltd. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 18-00121).
The Court of International Trade on Nov. 21 upheld the Commerce Department's order to CBP to assess antidumping duties on exporter Goodluck India's entries subject to the third administrative review of the antidumping duty order on cold-drawn mechanical tubing of carbon and alloy steel from India despite a previous order provisionally excluding the entries from the AD order. Judge Gary Katzmann found Goodluck's previous entries, but not the exporter itself, were excluded from the order.
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade: