The scope of the U.S. government's remand request in an Enforce and Protect Act case in light of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's ruling in Royal Brush Manufacturing v. U.S. is "not appropriate," plaintiffs led by Newtrend USA Co. said in a Sept. 18 reply brief. The government didn't say whether on remand it will put on the record "the exculpatory documents that Plaintiffs" gave to CBP during verification that the agency "refused to allow in the original proceeding," nor did it say whether it would allow additional briefing on those materials, the brief said (Newtrend USA Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00347).
The Commerce Department shifted to entirely relying on adverse facts available rates for antidumping duty respondent Saffron Living Co. on remand in a case on the AD investigation on mattresses from Thailand. The result is a 763.28% margin for Saffron and a 572.66% mark for all-other exporters, up considerably from 37.48% prior to the remand (Brooklyn Bedding v. United States, CIT # 21-00285).
The Court of International Trade on Sept. 20 upheld the Commerce Department's decision on remand to include importer SMA Surface's Twilight product within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on quartz surface products from China. Judge Gary Katzmann said that SMA Surfaces waived its challenge to the remand, which said the product doesn't qualify for the crushed glass surface product exclusion, by failing to present developed arguments in response to the remand decision.
China will appeal a World Trade Organization panel ruling rejecting its claim that the retaliatory tariffs placed on the U.S. in response to Section 232 duties were justified, the country's Ministry of Commerce said Sept. 19, according to an unofficial translation. Beijing will appeal "into the void" seeing as the Appellate Body currently doesn't function, barring future enforcement action against China in the dispute.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Exporters Carbon Activated Tianjin Co. and Carbon Activated Corp. will appeal a July Court of International Trade decision upholding the Commerce Department's surrogate value picks for five inputs in an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on activated carbon from China (see 2307240049). The five inputs are carbonized material, coal tar, hydrochloric acid, steam and bituminous coal. Per the notice of appeal, the exporters will take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In the opinion, the trade court also sustained the valuation of ocean freight costs, calculation of surrogate financial ratios and acceptance of respondent Datong Juqiang Activated Carbon Co.'s reporting of its bituminous coal consumption (Carbon Activated Tianjin Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. # 22-00017).
The Court of International Trade in a Sept. 19 opinion said the Commerce Department properly allowed respondent Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. to supplement its questionnaire response on remand by providing additional information pertaining to service-related revenues and expenses. Judge Mark Barnett said the supplement was permitted pursuant to a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision, which said that Hyundai should have been given the chance to supplement the record and that Commerce's use of partial adverse facts available was "unsupported by substantial evidence."
The International Trade Commission failed to support its "central" underselling analysis as part of the injury investigation on phosphate fertilizers from Morocco and Russia, the Court of International Trade ruled in a Sept. 19 opinion. Judge Stephen Vaden said that since the commission's underselling theory "undergirds" the remaining statutory considerations in the proceeding -- volume, price and impact -- the ITC must revisit its findings on these factors as well should it continue to find that the imports were undersold. The underselling theory "contaminat[ed]" these remaining findings, the opinion said.
The World Trade Organization on Sept. 15 released a new publication covering export controls. The report looks at "how WTO members have used different international agreements" beyond the trade body as grounds to set export regulations to support initiatives in "environmental protection, hazardous waste management, weapons control and combating illegal drugs trade."
The EU General Court's Grand Chamber on Sept. 13 rejected the Venezuelan government's challenge of the EU's Venezuela sanctions regime. The court said the European Council "relied on credible and reliable information" to assess the situation in Venezuela, which included "brutal repression" by the government. The court also said Venezuelan reports showing its government prosecuted these human rights abuses weren't enough to reveal a "manifest error" in the council's decision. The sanctions regime itself didn't violate international law, the court added, nor was it an illegal countermeasure because the sanctions weren't meant to be a reaction to an "internationally wrongful act imputable" to the Venezuelan government.