CIT Affirms Exclusion of Finished Heat Sinks from China Aluminum Extrusions AD/CV Orders
The Court of International Trade affirmed an International Trade Commission negative injury determination for finished heat sinks in the antidumping and countervailing duty investigations of aluminum extrusions from China (A-570-967). The ITC found injury to U.S. industry by imports of other types of aluminum extrusions, so the International Trade Administration issued AD and CV duty orders. These orders excluded finished heat sinks from the scope, however.
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.
In its preliminary injury determination on aluminum extrusions from China, the ITC did not distinguish between finished heat sinks and all other forms of aluminum extrusions. But in its final determination, the ITC reversed course and found that finished heat sinks differ from all other aluminum extrusions, including “fabricated heat sinks,” because they are final products, ready to be sold to electronic manufacturers, that are tested to meet specific end-product specifications. The ITC found injury to U.S. producers of aluminum extrusions, but not to U.S. producers of finished heat sinks, so the ITA modified the scope of its AD and CV duty orders to exclude finished heat sinks.
Plaintiff Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee challenged the ITC’s: (1) decision to treat finished heat sinks as different merchandise from other aluminum extrusions; (2) finding that imports of finished heat sinks do not injure U.S. industry; and (3) determination that there is no threat of injury to domestic finished heat sink producers by future imports of finished heat sinks.
CIT found no reason to overturn the ITC’s decision to treat finished heat sinks as a different class of merchandise, and said the ITC adequately supported its findings. CIT came to similar conclusions on the questions of injury and threat of injury, but also found that in many instances the plaintiffs didn’t exhaust their administrative remedies in their arguments to ITC during the proceeding.
(Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee v. United States,Slip Op. 12-129, dated 10/11/12 (public version issued 10/22/12), Judge Barzilay)
(Attorneys: Brian McGill of King & Spalding for plaintiff Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee; Peter Sultan for defendant International Trade Commission; Sydney Mintzer of Mayer Brown for defendant-intervenor Aavid Thermalloy)