CIT Dismisses Part of Challenge to China Aluminum Extrusions AD Scope, but Case Will Proceed
The Court of International Trade dismissed part of a challenge to the scope exclusion on finished heat sinks in the antidumping order on aluminum extrusions from China (A-570-967) for lack of jurisdiction under the 28 USC 1581(i) residual provision, but the challenge will proceed on different grounds.
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.
AEFTC is challenging the AD duty order’s exclusion of all finished heat sinks, instead of only finished heat sinks sold to electronics manufacturers. The International Trade Administration’s final determination had included finished heat sinks in the scope, but the International Trade Commission said U.S. producers of finished heat sinks for electronics manufacturers were not injured in its final injury determination. The ITA implemented the ITC’s partial negative injury determination in the AD duty order on aluminum extrusions from China, but did not limit the scope exclusion to finished heat sinks sold to electronics manufacturers. Instead, the ITA excluded all finished heat sinks. The ITA then issued instructions to CBP detailing the exclusion.
The court ruled that the Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee can’t challenge the ITA’s instructions on Section 1581(i) grounds, because Section 1581(c) jurisdiction is available for challenging the AD duty order underlying the instructions.
The court declined to dismiss AEFTC’s Section 1581(c) challenge to the AD duty order, so the case will proceed despite defendant-intervenors claim that AEFTC didn’t exhaust administrative remedies. Defendant-intervenors argued that AEFTC should have first filed a request for a scope determination, but the court said such a request would only have covered specific imports, and not finished heat sinks in general.
(Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee v. United States, Slip Op. 13-26, dated 02/27/13, Judge Pogue)