The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade should send back the Commerce Department's constructed value (CV) profit rate for antidumping respondent Building Systems de Mexico (BSM) if the court does not uphold the de minimis rate calculated by Commerce on remand, BSM argued in Aug. 19 comments. Arguing that the remand results should be sustained, BSM, replying to the AD petitioner, continued to critique the CV profit rate in case the de minimis rate is not upheld (Building Systems de Mexico v. United States, CIT #20-00069).
The Commerce Department unlawfully used an alternate method for calculating normal value in an antidumping duty review on goods from China, respondent Hangzhou Ailong Metal Products argued in an Aug. 22 motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade. The exporter argued Commerce illegally based normal value on the price at which the subject merchandise, square tubes, is sold in other countries, rather than base normal value on the quantity of raw materials used to make the square tubes (Hangzhou Ailong Metal Products Co. v. U.S., CIT #22-00116).
The Commerce Department erred when using adverse facts available over the reporting of various Malaysian inland freight data in antidumping duty respondent Euro SME's home market and U.S. sales databases, the respondent argued in an Aug. 19 brief at the Court of International Trade. Euro SME further railed against Commerce's use of AFA over the reporting of certain sales data kept in the normal course of business (Euro SME v. United States, CIT #22-00108).
The Commerce Department erred in rejecting food and vegetable processing giant Seneca Foods Corporation's requests for exclusions from Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs, Seneca argued in an Aug. 19 complaint at the Court of International Trade. The vegetable canning company said that Commerce violated the Administrative Procedure Act by failing to meaningfully consider and explain its rejection of the exclusion requests (Seneca Foods Corporation v. United States, CIT #22-00243).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Plaintiffs in an antidumping duty case will appeal a Court of International Trade decision upholding the rate calculated for non-individually investigated respondents in an antidumping duty administrative review on steel nails from Taiwan (see 2206170040). PrimeSource Building Products and consolidated plaintiffs Cheng Ch International Co., Ltd., China Staple Enterprise Corporation, De Fasteners Inc., Hoyi Plus Co., Ltd., Liang Chyuan Industrial Co., Ltd., Trim International Inc., UJL Industries Co., Ltd., Yu Chi Hardware Co., Ltd., and Zon Mon Co., Ltd. will take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, according to two notices of appeal filed Aug. 12. In the June 16 opinion, the trade court found the plaintiffs did not provide enough evidence to to establish that the expected method -- the practice of averaging adverse facts available rates in the absence of non-AFA, zero or de minimis margins -- should not be used (PrimeSource Building Products v. U.S. CIT #20-03911).
Nucor Corporation, both consolidated plaintiff and defendant-intervenor in a countervailing duty case, is appealing to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit a lower court ruling that the Commerce Department properly found that electricity was not provided below cost in South Korea, in an investigation on carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate (see 2206130054), it said Aug. 12. Court of International Trade Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said that both issues previously remanded by the Federal Circuit -- Commerce's reliance on the preferential-rate standard and its failure to address the Korean Power Exchange's (KPX's) impact on the South Korean electricity market as rendering cost-recovery analysis -- now comply with the appellate court's ruling (POSCO v. United States, CIT Consol. #16-00227).