CIT Tosses AD Case Over Use of Only 1 Respondent to Make Separate AD Rate
The Court of International Trade in a Jan. 20 order dismissed a case on the 2020-21 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on activated carbon from China. Commerce originally tapped two mandatory respondents in the review, selecting Datong Juqiang Activated Carbon and Jilin Bright Future Chemicals. The agency gave Datong Juqing a zero percent dumping rate while assigning Jilin Bright a $0.62 per kilogram dumping margin. The agency then assigned separate rate respondents the same $0.62/kg rate it gave to Jilin Bright (Carbon Activated Tianjin Co., et al. v. United States, CIT #22-00335).
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.
Plaintiffs, led by Carbon Activated Tianjin Co., filed suit at the trade court to argue that Commerce illegally based the separate rate on just the one mandatory respondent (see 2301100063). In an unrelated action, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said that the agency cannot base the all-others rate on the rate found for a single mandatory respondent (see 2208290026). The plaintiffs filed the case preemptively over AD refunds it was due after the case's final results were released. After the petitioners failed to challenge the review, the plaintiffs dropped the case to collect their refunds.