CIT Dismisses U.S. Importer's Claims, Sustains China Laminated Woven Sacks AD Review
The Court of International Trade dismissed claims that the International Trade Administration improperly ordered the retroactive suspension of liquidation of some of Chinese woven sack exporter Zibo Aifudi Plastic Packaging Co., Ltd.’s subject merchandise as moot, and sustained the International Trade Administration’s decision to apply the China-wide rate to AMS as a result of Adverse Facts Available (AFA) in the 2008-09 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on laminated woven sacks from China (A-570-916).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
(During the administrative review at issue, the petitioners raised concerns that Aifudi did not include subject merchandise produced from non-Chinese origin fabric in its submissions to the ITA. Aifudi had relied on a CBP ruling (HQ N08508), which said the laminated woven sacks it made with non-Chinese origin fabric were not of Chinese origin, in determining the woven sacks at issue were not subject to the AD order. The ITA disagreed, determining that the woven sacks were subject to the AD order, and issued a “clarification” of its liquidation instructions to CBP ordering it to continue to suspend liquidation of all entries of laminated woven sacks from China, regardless of country of origin of the fabric used.
Aifudi later withdrew from the administrative review following the preliminary results, and asked that its business confidential information be destroyed. Aifudi was assigned the China-wide rate of 91.73% in the final results because, according to the ITA, there was no longer any record evidence it could rely on to assign Aifudi a separate rate.)
AMS Associates, d/b/a Shapiro Packaging, the U.S. importer of products produced by Aifudi, argued that (1) the ITA improperly ordered CBP to retroactively suspend liquidation in the ITA’s “clarification” of its instructions; and (2) the ITA had enough public information, even after Aifudi ordered its business confidential information was destroyed, to determine that Aifudi was not state-controlled and therefore not part of the China-wide entity.
CIT dismissed Shapiro’s first claim that the ITA improperly ordered a retroactive suspension of liquidation on its woven sacks made from non-Chinese origin fabric, because there were no unliquidated entries of such merchandise at the time the ITA issued its clarification. Therefore, said CIT, Shapiro’s claims are moot and CIT does not have jurisdiction over the matter.
CIT also disagreed with Shapiro’s request for a remand to assign a separate rate to Aifuldi’s merchandise. Shapiro failed to convince the court that there is enough information on the record of the case to allow the ITA to determine such a separate rate now that Aifuldi’s confidential information has been removed, CIT said, and Shapiro failed to point to a viable alternate rate that should have been used instead of the China-wide rate.
(Slip Op. 12-98, dated 07/27/12, Judge Musgrave)