The Court of International Trade remanded the Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available in an antidumping case, finding that the agency did not allow for proper notice and response from South Korean steel exporter Hyundai Steel Co. In an April 27 opinion made public on May 6, Judge Richard Eaton ruled that Commerce also violated its statutory authority by assigning the all-others rate to one of Hyundai's affiliated freight companies -- dubbed “Company A” in the opinion. On remand, Commerce was instructed to identify the precise data that it judged insufficient and give Hyundai an opportunity to fix the deficiency.

CNC Associates is being investigated after allegations of evasion of antidumping and countervailing duties required on imported wooden cabinets and vanities and components from China, CBP said in a May 5 notice. The investigation stems from allegations filed under the Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) by MasterBrand Cabinets, an Indiana cabinetmaker, CBP said. The company alleged that CNC evaded AD/CV duties using transshipment through Malaysia. MasterBrand is represented by Wiley Rein lawyer Timothy Brightbill, who represents several EAPA allegers.

Negative injury determinations that ended antidumping duty investigations on polyethylene terephthalate resin from Brazil, Indonesia, South Korea, Pakistan and Taiwan in 2018 will stand, after the Court of International Trade sustained a remand redetermination from the International Trade Commission that provided further explanation of the ITC’s decisions without any changes to the end result.

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with some recent top stories. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The Court of International Trade on May 5 upheld the Commerce Department's rejection of Vietnamese steel exporter Vnsteel-Phu My Flat Steel Co.'s (PMF) quantity and value questionnaire in an antidumping duty circumvention case. In the opinion, Judge Timothy Reif sided with Commerce, ruling that the agency's decision to instead apply adverse facts available was in accordance with the law, given PMF's incomplete, then untimely resubmission of, the Q&V questionnaire form.

The Commerce Department will no longer apply adverse facts available to the antidumping rate for an Indian shrimp exporter, it said in remand results filed May 4 (Calcutta Seafoods Pvt. Ltd. v. U.S., CIT # 19-00201). The filing follows a Feb. 3 Court of International Trade decision which found that Commerce did not aid a small, first-time mandatory respondent to an AD case enough and unlawfully applied AFA to the exporter (see 2102030006). Commerce will now use neutral facts available, leading the agency to drop frozen warmwater shrimp exporter Elque Group's dumping margin to 27.66% from 110.9%.

Nike shoes that include Bluetooth connectivity, data processing, flash memory and auto-fit technology are classifiable as shoes, CBP said in an April 30 ruling. The company had argued the shoes should be classified based upon the Bluetooth transceiver, similar to smartwatches that rely on Bluetooth to transmit data, under subheading 8517.62. "Wearable 'smart' technology is a growing segment of the marketplace," CBP said. "Without a doubt, these types of goods will require individual, or case-by-case, analyses in order to determine their essential character." Jeffrey Whalen, a lawyer for Nike, requested the tariff classification ruling from CBP.

Nearly 600 pages comprise two administrative record indexes, one “non-confidential,” the other “confidential,” filed April 30 with the Court of International Trade by government defendants in the massive Section 301 litigation challenging the lawfulness of the lists 3 and 4A tariffs on Chinese imports. The roughly 3,600+ complaints seek to get the tariffs vacated and the duties refunded, alleging they run afoul of the 1974 Trade Act and violate 1946 Administrative Procedure Act protections against sloppy rulemakings.

The Court of International Trade ruled that the Commerce Department improperly applied adverse facts available to Chinese ribbon exporter Yama Ribbons and Bows Co. in a countervailing duty administrative review. In an April 30 opinion, Judge Timothy Stanceu found that Commerce did not consider record evidence fairly when determining whether Yama received a subsidy from the Export Buyer's Credit Program from the Export-Import Bank of China. Remanding the case, Stanceu also held that Commerce failed again to consider all relevant record evidence in its decision to include subsidy rates to inputs of synthetic yarn and caustic soda in the CVD review.

A company must be able to prove that prices weren't distorted for transactions involving non-market economies (NMEs) when claiming first sale treatment, the Department of Justice said in an April 29 Court of International Trade filing (Imperia Trading, Inc. v. U.S., CIT # 15-00142). DOJ's argument relies on a recent CIT decision involving imported Meyer cookware that said the involvement of Chinese companies made it difficult to determine whether a transaction is affected by non-market influence (see 2104200075). DOJ made the filing as part of a dispute over whether Imperia Trading, an importer of apparel made in China, can use the sale from a Hong Kong middleman company for appraisement.