The Court of International Trade on Jan. 19 granted a stipulation of facts and joint motion for judgment from importer SGS Sports and the U.S. in a customs spat on the classification of reimported swimsuits. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said that, per the stipulation of facts, SGS Sports' entries qualify for duty-free treatment under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 9801.00.20.

The Court of International Trade in a Jan. 19 opinion sustained the Commerce Department's final remand results in a case on the countervailing duty investigation of phosphate fertilizers from Russia. Judge Jane Restani upheld Commerce's decision use of exporter PhosAgro's profit before tax calculation rather than its gross profit figure in its profit ratio calculation. The agency explained that the profit before tax is "narrower and helps to isolate costs for phosphate ore mining and beneficiation activities." Restani said that PhosAgro failed to show that "including expenses broader than those involved in the mining and beneficiation of phosphate ore would bolster Commerce's goal to render an accurate profit ratio."

The Court of International Trade on Jan. 16 rejected the Commerce Department's finding that importer Columbia Aluminum Products' door thresholds evaded the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China. Judge Timothy Stanceu said CBP's final evasion determination and administrative review of the final decision contained "multiple errors, both of fact and of law." For instance, CBP pointed to no evidence showing that Columbia received aluminum door thresholds from China, transshipped the thresholds from China through Vietnam or falsely declared the country of origin as Vietnam instead of China. Stanceu added that CBP erroneously relied on a 2019 anti-circumvention proceeding, which applies only to aluminum extrusions exported from Vietnam made from aluminum previously extruded in China.

The Court of International Trade in a Jan. 5 opinion made public Jan. 16 sustained the Commerce Department's remand results reversing the use of adverse facts available against exporter Oman Fasteners for filing submitted 16 minutes late. The result is a zero percent margin for the company as part of the sixth antidumping review on steel nails from Oman. Judge M. Miller Baker upheld Commerce's use of Oman Fasteners' quarterly costs and not annual costs in calculating the company's cost of production, as well as its decision not to deduct Section 232 steel and aluminum duties from the U.S. price for all of Oman's entries.

The Court of International Trade in a Jan. 8 opinion rejected a motion from the U.S. seeking to retract the court's public opinion sustaining an affirmative injury finding from the International Trade Commission and to bracket information the government said was confidential. Touting the need for transparency in the court system, Judge Stephen Vaden said that the information the government sought to redact -- certain company names and numerical approximations -- is not confidential because the ITC failed to properly bracket it during litigation or the information is publicly available. The judge noted that neither "administrative agencies nor this Court can hide from scrutiny by censoring information," adding that only "truly confidential" information may be hidden from the public.

The Court of International Trade on Dec. 29 sustained the Commerce Department's final results in the 2019-20 antidumping duty administrative review on lined paper products from India. Judge Stephen Vaden said that Commerce didn't commit a programming error by altering respondent Navneet Education's response to "YES" to the question of whether product characteristic information was provided. While Navneet didn't give the agency the physical characteristics of the goods in its cost database, Navneet did put the data in question on the record as part of its submissions to Commerce, the court noted.

The Court of International Trade on Dec. 28 said action camera-maker GoPro's imports of eight camera housing models are properly classified under the company's proffered Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading of 8529.90.86, free of duty. This subheading provides for "[p]arts suitable for use solely or principally with the apparatus" of heading 8525. Judge Timothy Reif spent the bulk of the opinion discussing how the camera housings do not fit under the heading Customs used, 4202, which carries a 20% duty rate. Reif said the housings are not "cases" because they don't require the user to remove, modify or open to access the camera and because the housings boost the camera's functionality.

The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's use of total adverse facts available against antidumping respondent Saffron Living Co. after the company withdrew from the case on remand. Sustaining the 760% AD rate against the company in the investigation on mattresses from Thailand, Judge M. Miller Baker said the remand results are upheld since no remaining party contests the mark. The case was on remand so Commerce could attempt to verify data from Saffron, though this became impossible after Saffron withdrew from the proceeding.

The Court of International Trade on Dec. 21 sustained the Commerce Department's fourth remand results in a case on an antidumping investigation into carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from Germany. Judge Leo Gordon noted that the court already rejected exporter AG der Dillinger Huttenwerke's argument that Commerce improperly rejected the company's proposed quality code for sour service pressure vessel plate, adding that Dillinger didn't properly show reconsideration of the issue is "appropriate." The judge also rejected petitioner Nucor's challenge to the adjustment to the model match methodology to include a separate quality code for sour transport plate in calculating Dillinger's margin.

The Court of International Trade in a Dec. 19 opinion denied two quartz surface product exporters' bid to partially dissolve an existing injunction on liquidation after finding the companies did not make a "sufficient showing" for the motion. Concurrently, Judge Mark Barnett denied antidumping petitioner Cambria's motion for an injunction on liquidation, which was filed following the consolidation of its action with the exporters' suit so the relevant entries would be covered if the judge granted the motion to dissolve. Barnett denied Cambria's motion related to the entries for which liquidation is currently enjoined since he denied the motion to dissolve the injunction. The judge also denied Cambria's motion in relation to the entries not currently enjoined because the motion was untimely filed.