On Aug. 19, the Foreign Agricultural Service posted the following GAIN reports:
The Court of International Trade on Aug. 15 remanded the final results of the 2009-10 antidumping duty administrative review on activated carbon from China, citing several issues with the average rates assigned to non-individually reviewed “separate rate” companies. Because the rates for the only individually reviewed companies were de minimis, Commerce based the $0.28/kg average rate for seven other companies on rates calculated for different companies in a previous review. That’s too far from the commercial reality of the separate rate companies, the court said. CIT also remanded the Commerce’s decision to use a “specific” per kilogram rate for one of the separate rate companies, as well as the agency’s calculation of surrogate values for inputs.
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a bid by Ashley Furniture and Ethan Allan for funds under the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act (CDSOA, also known as the Byrd Amendment). The two domestic furniture companies argued they were eligible for antidumping and countervailing duties paid under the wooden bedroom furniture from China orders, simply because they responded when the International Trade Commission asked whether they supported the original AD/CVD petitions. Ashley Furniture had answered that it opposed the petition, while Ethan Allan checked the box for “take no position.” According to the two companies, any sort of response qualified as support because it helped the ITC in the investigation. Like the Court of International Trade, the appeals court rejected the argument. Although in a similar case the court had ruled Chez Sidney qualified for CDSOA funds even though it took no position in the final phase questionnaire, that case was different because Chez Sidney checked the box for support of AD/CV duties during the preliminary phase, CAFC said.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed on Aug. 19 the Court of International Trade’s dismissal of an antidumping duty lawsuit on steel nails from China. The lower court had declined to rule on Itochu Building Products’ challenge to the revocation date for four types of nails, citing a failure to fully argue its case before Commerce. Itochu had only argued for an earlier revocation date before the preliminary results of the changed circumstances review, and not in the run-up to the final results, so it didn’t exhaust its administrative remedies, CIT had said (see 12092127). But the appeals court reversed on Aug. 19, because submitting comments after Commerce had already rejected Itochu’s arguments at the preliminary stage would have served no purpose, and actually would have harmed the company.
The International Trade Commission published a notice in the Aug. 19 Federal Register on the following AD/CV injury, Section 337 patent, and other trade proceedings (any notices that warrant a more detailed summary will appear in another ITT article):
The International Trade Commission is asking for comments by Aug. 28 on Toyo Tires’ request for a ban on imports of tires it alleges infringe its design patents on tread patterns. Toyo requested the Section 337 investigation on Aug. 14 (see 13081601). It says 22 companies are either manufacturing, importing, or selling the infringing tires in the U.S. Foreign tire manufacturers identified in the petition include Shandong Yongtai, Doublestar Tire, Tri-Ace, South China Tire, Guangzhou SCT, Shandong Linglong, and Weifang, all of China, as well as Svizz-One of Thailand.
The International Trade Commission is considering a ban on imports of computer peripherals like memory card readers that infringe patents held by Technology Properties Limited, it said Aug. 16. An ITC administrative law judge recommended on Aug. 2 limited exclusion orders and cease and desist orders against infringing product. The ITC began the Section 337 investigation in April 2012 (see 12042726). Respondents to the investigation include Acer, Brother, Canon, Dell, Fujitsu, HP, and Samsung, among others. Comments are due Sept. 4.
The International Trade Commission is publishing a notice in the Aug. 19 Federal Register on the following AD/CV injury, Section 337 patent, and other trade proceedings (any notices that warrant a more detailed summary will appear in another ITT article):
The Commerce Department will consider creating an exception from antidumping and countervailing duties for a type of rectangular wire, in a changed circumstances review of the AD/CVD orders on aluminum extrusions from China (A-570-967 / C-570-968). U.S. importer 3M Company requested the review, and two associations of domestic manufacturers sent letters to Commerce saying they don’t oppose the partial revocation. "Substantially all" domestic producers, or 85 percent, must support ending AD/CVD coverage of a product for the agency to partially revoke.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission is amending its safety standard for play yards to put in place the latest ASTM F406-13 standard for the product. Play yards are framed enclosures that include a floor and have mesh or fabric sided panels primarily intended to provide a play or sleeping environment for children. The new requirements will apply to all play yards manufactured or imported beginning Feb. 19, 2014.