There is no error in the Commerce Department's liquidation instructions, so importer MS Solar's lawsuit under Section 1581(i), the Court of International Trade's "residual" jurisdiction, should be dismissed, the U.S. said in a March 30 reply brief backing its motion to dismiss. Instead, the case should have been filed under Section 1581(c) to contest the antidumping duty review itself, the brief said (MS Solar Investments v. United States, CIT #21-00303).
The Commerce Department erred when it switched its zero percent dumping margin for Greek exporter Corinth Pipeworks Pipe Industry (CPW) to a 41.04% dumping rate despite the fact that the data was "entirely unchanged," the exporter told the Court of International Trade in a March 31 complaint. CPW also contested Commerce's use of adverse facts available despite the fact that it fully cooperated in the antidumping duty review and the agency's failure to conduct a verification, virtual or otherwise (Corinth Pipeworks Pipe Industry v. United States, CIT #22-00063).
The Court of International Trade remanded several elements of a case brought by Mexican exporter Building Systems de Mexico, in a March 21 opinion made public March 30 concerning the antidumping investigation into fabricated structural steel from Mexico covering entries in 2018. Judge Claire Kelly sent back elements of the Commerce Department's decision to use mandatory respondent Corey S.A.'s home market sales to explain why the agency rejected BSM's data for insufficient volume but relied on Corey's when it had less data, and to explain whether a particular sale was contracted for during the investigation period.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Taiwanese corrosion-resistant steel products exporters Yieh Phui Enterprise Co. and Prospeity Tieh signed off on the Commerce Department's remand results in an antidumping duty matter at the Court of International Trade. On remand, Commerce reversed its decision to collapse mandatory respondents Yieh Phui and Synn Industrial Co. with one of their affiliates, Propserity Tieh Enterprise Co., in a bid to bring its stance in line with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. "It is our position that the Department’s decision on the collapsing issue made in the Remand Results is in line with the [Federal Circuit's] decision," Yieh Phui's comments said (Prosperity Tieh Enterprise Co., Ltd. v. United States, CIT Consol. #16-00138).
Italian pasta exporters La Molisana and Valdigrano di Flavio Pagani have not provided "compelling reasons" for the Commerce Department to part with its "longstanding" and "reasonable" practice for reporting the protein content of pasta in an antidumping case, the U.S. told the Court of International Trade in a March 28 brief. Rather, the relevant statute, past agency practice and case law all show that Commerce properly based its product-matching criteria on physical characteristics. In doing so, the agency said it legally derived the pasta's protein content -- a physical characteristic -- from the nutrition information on the packaging label (La Molisana v. United States, CIT Consol. #21-00291).
The Commerce Department improperly found that Krakatau POSCO -- a joint venture between a private South Korean steel company and an Indonesian government-owned firm -- was not a government authority, leading Commerce to find its provision of cut-to-length steel plate below cost was not countervailable, the Wind Tower Trade Coalition said. Making its case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a March 28 opening brief, the coalition said that Commerce "effectively elevated form over substance, frustrated the intent of the CVD law" and allowed Indonesia's wind tower exporter to "escape duties" (PT. Kenertec Power System v. U.S., CIT Consol. #20-03687).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a 35% duty rate for StarKist's tuna salad pouches, agreeing with CBP's preferred Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading, in a March 30 opinion. Upholding the Court of International Trade's opinion, Judges Kimberly Moore, Timothy Dyk and Jimmie Reyna said that the tuna pouches were "not minced" and "in oil," prompting their placement under subheading 1604.14.10.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld the sanctions listing of Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska, finding that the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control provided proper evidence for the listing. The court also held that while Deripaska was found to no longer own two major energy companies, OFAC found him to still operate them, justifying his placement in the Russian sanctions regime.