The Commerce Department said that, after reviewing the facts, 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 goods primarily dedicated to the production of downstream products. Submitting its remand results to the Court of International Trade on July 24, Commerce changed its tune regarding why the input in question, steel scrap, was mainly dedicated to the production of downstream steel goods as part of the 2018 CVD review on steel concrete rebar from Turkey (Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret v. United States, CIT # 21-00565).
No lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade.
The Commerce Department illegally picked Germany as the third-country comparison market in the antidumping duty investigation on preserved mushrooms from the Netherlands, U.S. mushroom producer Giorgio Foods argued in a July 21 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Giorgio, the AD petitioner, said that none of the reasons Commerce gave for picking Germany was supported by substantial evidence, leading, in part, to a de minimis rate for respondent Prochamp and the company's exclusion from the AD order (Giorgio Foods v. U.S., CIT # 23-00133).
The Court of International Trade in a July 24 opinion granted the Commerce Department's voluntary remand request to address alleged errors in calculating the antidumping margin as part of the investigation on forged steel fluid end blocks from Germany. Judge Stephen Vaden also sent the case back after finding that Commerce did not express a clear rationale for its refusal to address petitioner Ellwood City Forge Co.'s claims on alternate legal grounds Commerce could have used to make a particular market situation adjustment.
The Court of International Trade on July 21 upheld surrogate value picks for five inputs in an antidumping duty administrative review on activated carbon from China. The five inputs are carbonized material, coal tar, hydrochloric acid, steam and bituminous coal.
Importer PrimeSource Building Products moved for a partial stay of the Court of International Trade's order dismissing its suit challenging President Donald Trump's expansion of Section 232 steel and aluminum duties onto "derivative" products. PrimeSource said it wants the order stayed pending the resolution of its appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court (Primesource Building Products v. U.S., CIT # 20-00032).
The Commerce Department failed to explain its "abrupt change in practice" from its past decision finding that exporter KG Dongbu Steel's debt-to-equity restructurings were not countervailable, Dongbu argued in a July 21 opening brief at the Court of International Trade. The exporter relied on the trade court's recent opinion finding in a separate case also brought by Dongbu in which the court agreed and said that the change in practice was "arbitrary and unlawful" (see 2307100028). "The facts are the same in this appeal" on the 2020 review of the CVD order on corrosion-resistant steel products from South Korea, and the court "should reach the same conclusion here" (KG Dongbu Steel Co. v. United States, CIT # 23-00055).
The Court of International Trade in a July 21 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's 2019-20 review of the antidumping duty order on activated carbon from China. Judge Mark Barnett issued the opinion in a case consolidating three challenges -- one led by respondent Carbon Activated Tianjin Co., one by respondent Datong Juqiang Activated Carbon Co. and one from petitioner Calgon Carbon Corp. Barnett sustained Commerce's surrogate values for six activated carbon inputs: carbonized material, coal tar, hydrochloric acid, steam, ocean freight and bituminous coal. The judge also upheld the calculation of surrogate financial ratios and Commerce's acceptance of Datong Juqiang's reporting of its bituminous coal consumption.
The Commerce Department illegally relied on unverified data from respondent Saffron Living Co. in an antidumping duty investigation on mattresses from Thailand, the Court of International Trade ruled in a July 20 opinion. While the government claimed that because Commerce was unable to verify Saffron's information, it could use the exporter's information as facts otherwise available, Judge M. Miller Baker said this reading would "eviscerate the separate requirement" that Commerce verify all information relied on in making a final determination.
The Court of International Trade in a July 24 opinion remanded the antidumping duty investigation on forged steel fluid end blocks from Germany. Judge Stephen Vaden sent the case back to the Commerce Department so the agency could address alleged errors in the antidumping rate calculation and because the agency did not express a clear rationale for its refusal to address petitioner Ellwood City Forge Co.'s claims on alternate legal grounds to make a particular market situation adjustment.