PET Sheet Exporter Requests Longer Remand Period in AD Case, Requests to Reopen Record
Polyethylene terephthalate sheet exporter OCTAL, Inc. filed a motion April 21 with the Court of International Trade in support of the Department of Justice's move to voluntarily remand an antidumping duty investigation, but called for additional time to for the Commerce Department to reconsider the case. OCTAL says the standard 90-day period of remand is not long enough, arguing Commerce should reopen the record to obtain additional information on the central claim in the lawsuit.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
OCTAL had challenged Commerce's finding in an antidumping duty investigation that the company sold PET sheet from Oman. OCTAL claims it was not given the chance to comment during the investigation on a Commerce determination that the exporter was affiliated with one of its customers. DOJ agreed, filing a motion April 1 to voluntarily remand.
DOJ disagreed the record should be reopened so that additional facts can be added to the antidumping investigation. Responding to OCTAL's call to reopen the record, DOJ submitted a motion April 22 for leave to file a reply in support of its voluntary remand motion. "Although no party has opposed our motion, in their response, (the plaintiffs) sought additional relief from the Court in the nature of a longer remand in which the Department of Commerce would be forced, against its will, to reopen the record," DOJ said in its motion.
While agreeing on the need to remand, the two parties disagreed in the manner in which it should be done. OCTAL said Commerce came to its conclusion that the exporter was affiliated with one of its customers late in the investigation and "long after the evidentiary record had closed." DOJ is primarily concerned with the lack of opportunity Commerce provided OCTAL to comment on the issue of affiliation. "Although Commerce does not need to invite comments regarding every potential post-preliminary change, Commerce normally provides an opportunity to comment, where, as here, the effect of the post-preliminary change may significantly alter the calculation," DOJ said in its motion for voluntary remand.