The Commerce Department properly found that electricity in South Korea wasn't provided to two countervailing duty respondents for less than adequate remuneration, the Court of International Trade said in a June 13 opinion. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said that the position is backed by substantial evidence and in line with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's prior ruling in the case. The Federal Circuit previously said that Commerce's reliance on a preferential-rate standard was illegal and that the agency failed to address the Korean Power Exchange's impact on the South Korean electricity market. Both issues were addressed, leading to Choe-Groves to sustain the remand.

The Court of International Trade in a May 31 opinion made public June 10 sustained the Commerce Department's final results in the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on hot-rolled steel flat products from Australia. The U.S. Steel Corporation filed the case to argue that exporter BlueScope Steel (AIS) reimbursed the affiliated importer BlueScope Steel Americas for the antidumping duties paid on the subject entries by decreasing the invoice price by the amount of the duties, and that Commerce should've deducted from the exporter's U.S. price because of it. Judge Richard Eaton said this was a "garden variety transaction among an exporter, an importer, and an unaffiliated purchaser," and that no evidence was presented that would prove the importer was reimbursed.

The Court of International Trade in a June 1 opinion made public June 9 granted the U.S.' motion to dismiss a case seeking Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusions brought by exporter Borusan Mannesmann and importer Gulf Coast Express Pipeline. Judge Timothy Reif said that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction since the subject entries are unliquidated. The court ruled that the plaintiffs failed to show that CBP's decision not to issue refunds before liquidation constitutes a protestable decision.

The Court of International Trade in a June 9 opinion denied Indian exporter Gujarat Fluorochemicals Limited's bid for injunctive relief against paying cash deposits from a countervailing duty investigation and liquidation. Judge Timothy Stanceu ruled that the plaintiff failed to show that it would likely face harm without the preliminary injunction since the company did not show that future refunds of excess cash deposits would be an "inadequate remedy." As for the injunction on liquidation, the court said that there's no draft order in "satisfactory form" which could allow the court to issue the standard injunction against liquidation. However, Stanceu gave the plaintiff 30 days to renew the injunction bid.

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a June 9 opinion dismissed a broad challenge to President Donald Trump's Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs. The plaintiffs, led by USP Holdings, argued that the Commerce Secretary's report preceding presidential action violated the law since it failed to outline an imminent threat to the domestic industry as required by the statute and was unsupported by substantial evidence. A three-judge panel at the court ruled against these arguments, holding that there is no imminence requirement in the statute and that the threat determination is not reviewable under the "arbitrary and capricious" standard since the Secretary's action "is only reviewable for compliance with the statute." Judge Timothy Dyk, author of the opinion, also ruled that the statute grants the president the discretion to set the nature and duration of the tariffs.

In a series of three opinions, the Court of International Trade denied domestic honey, crawfish, garlic and mushroom producers' bids for reconsideration of the court's past ruling dismissing some of their claims as time-barred by the statute of limitations. The cases, led by Adee Honey Farms, Hilex Poly and American Drew, sought court orders to get CBP to distribute delinquency interest that should be paid to affected domestic producers under the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000. Previously, Judge Timothy Stanceu said that the only timely claims were the ones relating to the application of the Final Rule to the plaintiffs' individual CDSOA distributions happening in the two years before their implementing their actions. In the June 8 opinions, Stanceu held that no "valid reason" was put forth as to why the court should vacate or modify the decisions to dismiss the untimely claims.

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a June 7 order granted Porsche Motorsports North America'as motion to voluntarily dismiss its lawsuit seeking duty-free treatment of auto parts temporarily exported then reimported. The Court of International Trade previously denied Porsche the treatment, ruling that auto parts exported to Canada for use at auto races then re-imported don't qualify for duty-free treatment under a U.S. goods returned tariff provision for "tools of the trade." The trade court found that the auto parts and tools were exported to generate sales to race teams rather than for a professional purpose, as required under subheading 9801.00.8500.

The Court of International Trade in a June 6 opinion dismissed customs broker license exam test taker Byungmin Chae's case contesting five questions on his broker exam. Judge Timothy Reif said that CBP was right to dismiss Chae's appeal for four of the contested questions but that the agency was wrong to dismiss the fifth appeal. However, the court's move to grant credit on this one question was not enough to get Chae over the 75% threshold needed to pass the test.

President Joe Biden announced on June 6 a 24-month grace period during which solar cells from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam may be imported free from antidumping and countervailing duties, regardless of the results of an ongoing anti-circumvention inquiry being carried out by the Commerce Department.

The Court of International Trade in two May 26 orders sustained the Commerce Department's remand results in an antidumping case and a countervailing duty case, both brought by Turkish exporter Celik Halat. The cases contested the Commerce Department's decision to reject minutes-late submissions. Following a remand, the agency accepted the submissions, resulting in lowered AD/CVD rates for Celik Halat and the ultimate acceptance of the remand by the trade court.