The Court of International Trade in a July 28 order upheld CBP's finding on remand that importer Diamond Tools Technology didn't evade the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades from China. The evasion finding applies to DTT's imports of diamond sawblades assembled in Thailand but made with Chinese cores and segments brought in before Dec. 1, 2017. CBP made the decision under respectful protest on remand upon finding that DTT did not make false statements to the agency given the court's interpretation of Commerce's understanding of the scope.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a key July 27 opinion held that CBP violated importer Royal Brush Manufacturing's rights to due process by refusing to allow it access to business confidential information in an antidumping and countervailing duty evasion proceeding. The court ruled that the "relatively immutable" principle of due process, where the government must provide access to the evidence used as the basis for an action that seriously injures an individual, extends to administrative proceedings. Judge Timothy Dyk, the author of the opinion, said the court is aware of no such court holding showing that business confidential information is exempt from this rule, adding there is no "legitimate government interest" in refusing to provide access to this information in Enforce and Protect Act cases. The court also said there is no case supporting the government's "extraordinary theory" that it can avoid due process compliance by failing to provide for a protective order.

The Court of International Trade in a July 21 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's 2019-20 review of the antidumping duty order on activated carbon from China. Judge Mark Barnett issued the opinion in a case consolidating three challenges -- one led by respondent Carbon Activated Tianjin Co., one by respondent Datong Juqiang Activated Carbon Co. and one from petitioner Calgon Carbon Corp. Barnett sustained Commerce's surrogate values for six activated carbon inputs: carbonized material, coal tar, hydrochloric acid, steam, ocean freight and bituminous coal. The judge also upheld the calculation of surrogate financial ratios and Commerce's acceptance of Datong Juqiang's reporting of its bituminous coal consumption.

The Court of International Trade in a July 24 opinion remanded the antidumping duty investigation on forged steel fluid end blocks from Germany. Judge Stephen Vaden sent the case back to the Commerce Department so the agency could address alleged errors in the antidumping rate calculation and because the agency did not express a clear rationale for its refusal to address petitioner Ellwood City Forge Co.'s claims on alternate legal grounds to make a particular market situation adjustment.

The government correctly classified counterweights for mini-excavators as "backhoe" parts under tariff subheading 8431.49.9044, meaning that they were not eligible for Section 301 tariff exclusion, ruled the Court of International Trade in a July 21 opinion. Judge Jane Restani sided with the government's dictionary definitions of "backhoe" and "excavator," rather than Norca's industry usage. Even if Norca’s argument about the commercial understanding is correct, "Norca cannot overcome legislative intent," said the court. The CIT cannot accept a commercial meaning that is at odds with the tariff schedule itself, Restani said in her ruling.

The Court of International Trade in a July 19 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's decision to raise the dumping margins in the 2018-19 review of the antidumping duties on heavy walled rectangular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Mexico for mandatory respondents Maquilacero and Prolamsa from 0% to 3.48% and 2.11%, respectively. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said Commerce properly corrected ministerial errors alleged by petitioner Nucor Corp. in Maquilacero's rate by "removing the inadvertent zeros within the calculation programming" and dropping data from the time before the review period. The judge also sustained the agency's decision to fix its currency conversion mistakes made in calculating Prolamsa's rate.

The Court of International Trade in a July 20 opinion granted the government's motion to toss Target's case seeking to invalidate a CIT order instructing CBP reliquidate Target's metal-top iron tables at the 72.29% dumping rate instead of the original 9.47% rate. Judge Leo Gordon said that were Target to succeed, the result would "turn the clock back over 40 years" prior to the Customs Court Act's passage and "again call into question whether a party before the Court could obtain full and complete relief." Reversing the order as Target requests would "elevate the principle of finality" of liquidation "over the inherent power" of the trade court under Article III of the Constitution, the judge said.

The Court of International Trade in a July 20 opinion remanded the Commerce Department's antidumping duty investigation on mattresses from Thailand. Judge M. Miller Baker ruled that Commerce's reliance on unverified data from respondent Saffron Living Co. was illegal. While the government claimed that because Commerce was unable to verify Saffron's information it could use the exporter's information as facts otherwise available, Baker said this reading would "eviscerate the separate requirement" that Commerce verify all information relied on in making a final determination. The judge also sent back Commerce's refusal to apply either transactions disregarded or major input rules in light of evidence of Saffron's substantial affiliated-party transactions, dubbing the government's defense "anemic."

The Court of International Trade sent back parts of the Commerce Department's 2018-19 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on frozen fish fillets from Vietnam. Judge M. Miller Baker said that while Commerce understands the concepts of sameness and comparability to "represent different concepts" when picking surrogate nations, the agency "misapplied the statutory standard" by excluding candidate surrogates that had a comparable level of economic development. The judge also upheld Commerce's decision not to grant exporter Dotaseafood a higher rate beyond the countrywide margin for failing to cooperate to the best of its ability given that the company did not rebut the presumption of state control. Lastly, Baker said exporter Nam Viet was legally granted a separate rate after the judge refused to reweigh evidence regarding the company's reporting of its affiliates.

The Court of International Trade in a July 14 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's remand results in a case on the 2017-18 review of the antidumping duty order on welded line pipe from South Korea. Judge Claire Kelly said that Commerce adequately explained its decision to reject exporter Nexteel's accounting method and classify the company's losses related to the suspension of its production lines as general and administrative expenses instead of costs of goods sold. The judge also said Commerce answered the court's previous questions on which of Nexteel's production lines were suspended during which parts of the review period and on whether the agency differentiates among suspension periods based on when they occur in the review period.