The Commerce Department will not consider arguments for a particular market situation that are devoid of quantifiable data, the agency said as part of a proposed update to its antidumping duty regulations. While Commerce acknowledged that it legally can consider non-quantifiable data per the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision in NEXTEEL v. U.S. (see 2304200048), the agency said it finds such arguments "typically unhelpful" to its analysis, proposing to not be required to consider them in determining whether a PMS exists. Commerce added that it will not be required to consider "speculative costs or prices" as well.
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will drop SunPower Manufacturing Oregon from an appeal of the case on the 2017-18 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on solar cells from China if the company does not enter an entry of appearance within 14 days. John Magnus, counsel for SunPower, told Trade Law Daily that the company did not participate in the proceedings at the Court of International Trade and shouldn't have been included as a party in the appeal before the Federal Circuit. In the case, the Commerce Department set surrogate values for silver paste, while revising its use of adverse facts available, choosing to use partial neutral facts available (see 2301050026) (Risen Energy Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1550).
The Commerce Department applied a more lenient standard to antidumping duty petitioner Nucor Tubular Products by accepting a correction to a ministerial error that was raised only after the final results in the 2018-19 administrative review of the AD order on heavy walled rectangular welded steel pipes and tubes from Mexico was issued, respondent Maquilacero argued in comments to the Court of International Trade on Commerce's remand results accepting the correction (Nucor Tubular Products v. U.S., CIT # 21-00543).
The Court of International Trade denied countervailing duty petitioner Nucor Corp.'s motion for a stay in a case involving the 2019 administrative review of the CVD order on carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from South Korea. Judge Mark Barnett said the court ruled on a similar stay request in a different case also brought by Nucor, finding in both instances that "Nucor's desire to avoid duplicative efforts is not the type of 'pressing need' meriting an indefinite stay" (Nucor Corp. v. United States, CIT # 23-00003).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a motion from plaintiff-appellants, led by Spanish olive growers Asociacion de Exportadores e Industriales de Aceitunas de Mesa, to get an additional 1,500 words to file in their reply brief in a case concerning the countervailing duty investigation on the ripe olives from Spain. Judge Kara Stoll told the olive growers that their brief is not to exceed 7,000 words and is due within 21 days. The olive growers asked for the additional words due to the "complexity of the issues presented in this appeal and the fact-specific nature of the arguments raised by the other parties" (see 2304170032) (Asociacion de Exportadores e Industriales de Aceitunas de Mesa v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1162).
CBP ignored Congress' "unambiguous express statutory command when it failed to distribute" interest assessed after liquidation, known as delinquency interest, under the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000, appellant Monterey Mushrooms said in a reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Adee Honey Farms, et al. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-2105).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted U.S. Steel Corp.'s motion to voluntarily dismiss its appeal on the Commerce Department's use of the Cohen's d test as part of its differential pricing analysis to root out "masked" dumping (SeAH Steel Corp. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1109). In this case and a separate appeal on the same issue, the court acknowledged that Maverick Tube Corp., Tenaris Bay City and IPSCO Tubulars will no longer participate in the proceedings. The opening brief in this matter, appealed by exporter SeAH Steel Corp., is due 60 days from May 4. The remaining appellees following the departure of the three companies are the U.S., U.S. Steel Corp., Vallourec Star and Welded Tube USA (SeAH Steel Corp. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1657).
The Court of International Trade should reject U.S. steel company Nucor Corp.'s stay motion in a case involving the 2019 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from South Korea, the U.S. argued. While Nucor wants the case stayed pending the resolution of litigation on the 2018 review of the same CVD order, the present action involves an issue not raised in the preceding case, the government said (Nucor Corp. v. United States, CIT #23-00003).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rejected importer China Custom Manufacturing's rehearing bid in an antidumping and countervailing duty scope case. In the decision, Judges Pauline Newman, Raymond Chen and Tiffany Cunningham said CCM's solar panel mounts do not qualify for the "finished merchandise" exclusion from antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China (see 2303020037). In its rehearing motion, CCM said that rehearing was needed to maintain uniformity of the appellate court's prior decisions concerning the "unambiguous plain language" of the finished merchandise exclusion rule. The rehearing bid was referred to the three judges that heard the case, then sent to the remaining active judges on the court (China Custom Manufacturing v. United States, Fed. Cir. #22-1345).