The Commerce Department dropped its particular market situation adjustment for the sales-below-cost test on remand at the Court of International Trade in an antidumping duty case on forged steel fluid end blocks from Germany, resulting in a zero percent AD rate for respondent BGH Edelstahl Siegen, if the rate is sustained (Ellwood City Forge Co., et al. v. United States, CIT # 21-00077).
CBP properly classified Shamrock Building Materials' steel conduit tubing imports from Mexico as steel tubing and not insulated fittings, the Court of International Trade ruled March 13. Judge Timothy Stanceu said the "uncontested facts" show the tubing is not insulated and is therefore subject to 25% Section 232 steel tariffs.
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Commerce Department is required by its own policies to use the country with the best data as the surrogate country in antidumping duty proceedings, the Catfish Farmers of America and other plaintiffs said in a March 10 reply brief. Although Commerce argued the AD laws didn't require it to look into whether Indonesia offered "superior" data for the 2019-20 review on frozen fish fillets from Vietnam, the Catfish Farmers pointed to Import Administration Policy Bulletin 04.1, which says if more than one country meets the statutory requirements for surrogates, that Commerce "will rely on values from the country that provides the highest quality data" (Catfish Farmers of America v. United States, CIT # 22-00125).
The Commerce Department properly included sales of solar cells from China to JA Solar USA from antidumping duty respondent Invertec Solar Energy Corp. as U.S. sales, the Court of International Trade ruled March 10. No party contested Commerce's remand results (JA Solar International v. United States, CIT # 21-00514).
The Court of International Trade doesn’t have jurisdiction to hear a case involving a textile company’s dispute with CBP, saying the company sought relief under the wrong statute, Judge Timothy Stanceu held in a March 10 opinion. The trade court found Printing Textiles, doing business as Berger Textiles, didn’t show why the denied protest challenge should be filed under Section 1581(i), the court's "residual" jurisdiction, and not Section 1581(a). Berger filed a notice of appeal the next business day.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Dismissing Sea Shepherd New Zealand's and Sea Shepherd Conservation Society's challenge of an expired comparability finding for New Zealand's West Coast North Island multispecies set-net and trawl fisheries would allow the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to evade review and take similar action in the future, the conservation groups said in a March 9 brief (Sea Shepherd New Zealand v. U.S., CIT # 20-00112).
The Commerce Department properly found that a type of aluminum sheet imported from Turkey by AA Metals was covered by the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on common alloy aluminum sheet from China, the Court of International Trade ruled in a March 10 opinion.
Federal judges last week questioned the Commerce Department's policies on the initiation of antidumping duty reviews for exporters with no entries of subject merchandise, asking why Commerce could continue an AD review if there were no entries on the record (Canadian Solar International v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 20-2162).