Judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit questioned claims from both exporter Dongkuk S&C Co. and the Commerce Department during Nov. 5 oral argument in a suit on the antidumping duty investigation on utility scale wind towers from South Korea (Dongkuk S&C Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1419).

The Court of International Trade rejected importer Retractable Technologies' bids for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction stopping the collection of Section 301 duties on its needles and syringes. However, in a decision made public Nov. 4, Judge Claire Kelly did stop liquidation of Retractable's entries during the course of the company's suit, which challenges the legality of a Section 301 rate hike on needles and syringes.

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.

The U.S. on Nov. 1 defended the Commerce Department's decision on remand to not grant exporter Gujarat Fluorochemicals a constructed export price offset in the antidumping duty investigation on granular polytetrafluorethylene resin from India. The government said Gujarat failed to provide a quantitative analysis that would justify the offset (Daikin America v. United States, CIT # 22-00122).

In response to the government (see 2409240057), a Turkish steel exporter again said Nov. 1 that the dates of its U.S. sales should be determined by its contract dates, not the dates on its invoices (Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret v. United States, CIT # 24-00018).

Watches that have case backs set with watch glass made of nonprecious materials -- such as synthetic sapphire -- are not considered to have cases made "wholly" of precious metal and are classified differently than watches that do, the Court of International Trade ruled Nov. 1. The holding came as a watch importer’s motion for judgment in a 2018 case wound up being denied, and the government’s was granted, by CIT Judge Jane Restani.

The Commerce Department reasonably placed greater emphasis on research and development investment when it found that solar cells from Cambodia were circumventing the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on solar cells from China, the U.S. said. Filing a reply brief to the Court of International Trade on Oct. 29, the government argued that the agency "set forth uncontroverted record evidence to explain that R&D is particularly important to solar producers" and that these investments are key to "technological breakthroughs in the solar industry" (BYD (H.K.) Co. v. United States, CIT # 23-00221).

German exporter Koehler petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for a writ of mandamus on Oct. 31 to settle the question of whether the company can be served via its U.S. counsel after the Court of International Trade refused to certify the issue for intermediate appeal. Koehler said the issue of whether CIT rules allow service on a foreign dependent through its U.S. counsel "is a basic, undecided question in this Circuit that is likely to recur" (Koehler Oberkirch GmbH v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 25-106).

The Transportation Department doesn't have "vested authority" to determine whether to admit entries of goods based on whether they comport with federal safety standards, the Court of International Trade held on Oct. 30. Judge Lisa Wang said that, as a result, CBP has the relevant admissibility authority and the trade court can hear the case.

The Commerce Department reasonably interpreted the Trade Act of 1930 to pause antidumping and countervailing duties on solar cells and modules from four Southeast Asian countries, the government told the Court of International Trade on Oct. 29. Responding to U.S. solar cell maker Auxin Solar and solar module designer Concept Clean Energy, the U.S. said the two companies' arguments belie "Congress' broad delegation of rulemaking authority" to respond to an emergency found by the president (Auxin Solar v. United States, CIT # 23-00274).