On February 10, 2011, in Norman G. Jensen, Inc., v. U.S., the Court of International Trade ruled that it lacks jurisdiction to compel U.S. Customs and Border Protection to rule on protests of liquidation, and that plaintiffs seeking a prompt CBP ruling on such protests should use available administrative procedures, such as filing a request for accelerated disposition, instead of seeking action through the CIT.

In the August 2006 - July 2007 antidumping duty administrative review of folding metal ironing tables from China, the ITA found Chinese producer Since Hardware (Gouangzhou) Co., Ltd. had provided falsified certificates of origin for its primary inputs, to claim its steel inputs were from market economy countries. The company had used identical questionable documents in the prior review. Therefore, with a legal challenge to the prior review still underway, domestic producer Home Products, Inc. sought to amend its complaint in that review with the new evidence of fraud, and to remand the case to the International Trade Administration, but the Court of International Trade denied the request. Now the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has ruled that since “new evidence indicates the agency’s proceedings were tainted by material fraud,” the CIT must remand the prior review to the ITA.

In its last remand in the antidumping duty investigation of wooden bedroom furniture from China, on the calculation of labor rates to use in valuing non-market economy (NME) exports, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ordered the ITA to use data from countries that are both economically comparable to the producing NME country and that are significant producers of comparable merchandise. The ITA then offered an approach based only on countries with incomes lower than China’s, resulting in far lower labor rate values. In response, domestic producers challenged 1) the ITA’s narrow grouping of low-income countries to use for labor costs; 2) the exclusion of data not available during the investigation period, 3) the exclusion of certain Indian wage data, and 4) the reliance solely on industry-specific wage rates. The Court of International Trade upheld all the agency’s choices except the selection of only countries with lower average incomes than China’s, and ordered the ITA to explain or alter that approach in favor of a more “balanced” set of countries. (See ITT’s Online Archives or 05/12/10 news, 10051935, for BP summary of the preceding appeals court remand.) (Slip Op. 11-14, dated February 9, 2011)

Russian urea producer and exporter MCC Eurochem sued over the International Trade Administration’s use of zeroing in the antidumping administrative review of solid urea from the Russian Federation for the period July 2008 -- June 2009. (Zeroing refers to the ITA’s practice of excluding from its margin calculations in administrative reviews those U.S. transactions which are made at or above fair value, and using only U.S. transactions with dumping margins. The ITA is currently reconsidering the policy.) However, the Court of International Trade denied the challenge, noting that the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has consistently upheld the reasonableness of the zeroing practice and has denied petitions for a rehearing in multiple high-profile cases. (Slip Op. 11-13, dated 01/25/11)

Vesuvius USA Corp. was rebuffed in an attempt to participate in a legal challenge to the AD duty order effective September 20, 2010 on certain magnesia bricks from Mexico and China. Vesuvius had earlier filed an appearance as a voluntary respondent, then withdrew from participation in the investigation. The court ruled the company had no standing, since by not participating in the investigation it had failed to exhaust its administrative remedies. The court further noted that merely filing an entry of appearance and an administrative protective order (the latter serves to protect the confidentiality of business information of participants in investigations and reviews) does not constitute participation sufficient to grant standing. (Note that there is also a companion CV duty order.) (Slip Op. 11-12, dated 01/31/11)

After the preliminary results in the June 2006 -- May 2007 AD administrative review of tapered roller bearings and parts thereof from China, the International Trade Administration altered its methodology for valuing imports manufactured by Peer Bearing Company-Changshan, and, applying “facts otherwise available” for certain missing raw material values (without an adverse inference since the company was cooperative), assigned the firm an AD duty rate of 92.94% for the final results, up from 59.41% in the preliminary results. In response to the Chinese producer’s challenge of these results, the Court of International Trade ordered the ITA to determine anew the appropriate raw material values and pricing methodology. (Slip Op. 11-10, dated 01/25/11)

Following the final results of the January-December 2006 countervailing duty administrative review of certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from India, the Court of International Trade instructed the International Trade Administration, among other remand orders, to reassess its determination that Essar Steel Ltd. had benefited from a Chhattisgarh State Industrial Policy since, in other review periods, the agency had found the policy did not benefit the company. For its remand redetermination, the ITA changed its conclusion, finding no benefit. Domestic manufacturers challenged the redetermination, but the court upheld the ITA’s altered position. (See ITT’s Online Archives or 01/01/10 news, 10010550, for BP summary of the decision that remanded the issue to ITA.) (Slip Op. 11-11, dated 01/28/11)

Following a remand of the results of the AD review of frozen warmwater shrimp from Thailand for the period February 2007 through January 31, 2008, Thai producer/exporters renewed a challenge to the ITA’s use of data obtained from U.S. Customs and Border Protection for purposes of selecting respondents. The court ruled that the use of the data is not arbitrary, is a reasonable application of the AD statute; and is supported by substantial evidence on the record.

Following the AD administrative review of ball bearings¹ from Japan for the period May 1994 through April 1995, liquidation was enjoined for several years because FYH Bearing Unit Inc., an importer of bearings made by Nippon Pillow Block Sales Co., Ltd., gained an injunction against liquidation, and subsequently domestic manufacturer Torrington Co. also was granted an injunction, for all entries in the period.

In Trumpf Medical Systems, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of International Trade granted in part Trumpf’s claims and ordered that U.S. Customs and Border Protection reliquidate entries of certain imported surgical light systems under HTS subheading 9018.19.95, as other electro-medical instruments, at a rate of duty-free. CIT also ordered the reliquidation of certain related light system components.