The Commerce Department's anti-circumvention inquiry into the antidumping and countervailing duties on corrosion-resistant steel (CORE) products from China did not violate the intent behind Congress' passage of the anti-circumvention statute, the U.S. said in an April 27 reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Al Ghurair Iron & Steel v. United States, Fed. Cir. #22-1199).

A contract clause between the middleman and the final customer is not proof of a bona fide sale for the purposes of determining whether a transaction is eligible for first sale treatment, CBP said in a recent ruling. Merely citing the clause within a contract does not provide actual proof of the facts of that sale or whether risk of loss and title actually transfer to the middleman before it entered into the transaction with the importer, CBP said in the Feb. 18 ruling, released by the agency April 26. The ruling was a response to an application for further review by Woodcraft Supply LLC, which contests CBP's denial of its first sale valuation of imported merchandise.

The Commerce Department continued to deny two groups of plaintiffs in an antidumping case -- led by Guizhou Tyre Co. and Double Coin Holdings -- separate rate status, finding on remand ordered by the Court of International Trade that the companies still failed to rebut the presumption of Chinese government control. Commerce said that Guizhou Tyre and Double Coin are not free from government control regarding how they pick their management and thus are under government control for the purposes of the antidumping duty investigation on truck and bus tires from China (Guizhou Tyre Co. v. United States, CIT #19-00031).

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

A good faith disagreement over the scope of antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders cannot be construed as a "material and false statement," needed to find evasion under the Enforce and Protect Act, importers Ikadan System USA and Weihai Gaosai Metal Product Co. argued in an April 26 brief at the Court of International Trade. As such, CBP's evasion finding is illegal, as it fails to make a proper finding of evasion, the brief said (Ikadan System USA v. United States, CIT #21-00592).

Steel exporter SeAH Steel Corp. wants a full court rehearing over a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit opinion that found reasonable the Commerce Department's practice of capping freight revenue when calculating U.S. price. Filing a motion for rehearing on April 25, SeAH said that the statute is not ambiguous on when U.S. price may be adjusted for freight costs seeing as it does not permit any adjustments for freight cost when the starting price does not include freight (NEXTEEL Co., Ltd. v. United States, CAFC # 21-1334)

The Commerce Department properly modified the scope of its antidumping duty and countervailing duty investigations on quartz surface products from China in response to evidence of evasion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said in an April 25 opinion. Building materials company Bruskin International argued against Commerce's decision to accept the petitioner's scope request, telling the court the agency should have treated it as a request to amend the petition. But Judges Todd Hughes, Haldane Mayer and Kara Stoll ruled that Commerce was not bound to the preliminary scope and that it properly found the scope to be defective due to evidence of evasion.

Court of International Trade Judge Timothy Stanceu granted a motion from importer Nutricia North America that asked to reopen discovery to replace the company's expert witness in an ongoing case regarding classification of infant formulas (Nutricia North America v. United States, CIT #16-00008). Nutricia asked for the record to be reopened after it discovered that its witness, Dr. Joel Lavine, was convicted of sexually abusing an adult former patient. With the order from Judge Timothy Stanceu, Nutricia will replace Lavine with Dr. Jonah Essers.

The Commerce Department must reconsider its decision to use a simple average to calculate the pooled standard deviation when using the Cohen's d test in its differential pricing analysis to target "masked dumping," the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said in an April 21 opinion. Ruling that Commerce strayed from the statistical literature without a proper explanation, Judges Pauline Newman, Alan Lourie and Richard Taranto said the agency should reconsider whether a weighted average for calculating the Cohen's d denominator is more appropriate.

Two companies that arrange for the shipment of goods with vessel operating carriers, Shine Shipping and Shine International (Shine), will no longer be able to import, export, transport, offer for sale, sell or assist any such activity, for any goods bearing Nike trademarks, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York said. Wrapping up a trademark infringement case, the district court released the terms of the stipulated permanent injunction and final order against Shine, including orders to verify every shipment to the U.S. with either the foreign shipper, importer or foreign freight forwarder (Nike v. B&H Customs Services, S.D.N.Y. #20-01214).