CAFC Denies Rehearing Bid in AD Scope Case on Dual-Stenciled Pipe
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on July 24 denied exporter Saha Thai Steel Pipe Co.'s petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc of the court's decision to include dual-stenciled pipe in the scope of the antidumping duty order on circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Thailand (Saha Thai Steel Pipe Public Co. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-2181).
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.
The petition was referred to judges Kimberly Moore, Alan Lourie, Timothy Dyk, Sharon Prost, Jimmie Reyna, Richard Taranto, Raymond Chen, Kimberly Hughes, Kara Stoll, Tiffany Cunningham and Richard Stark -- the judges "who are in regular active service."
Saha Thai argued that the majority "ignored 38 years of settled expectations about the specific limits" of the AD order and also "broke new ground in contravention of long-standing Federal Circuit precedent" by letting Commerce expand the order's scope "beyond those products for which the International Trade Commission had found injury" (see 2406240036).
The AD order's scope language includes standard pipe but excluded line pipe, and Saha Thai's dual-stenciled pipes fit the industry specifications for both line and standard pipe. Two of the three judges deciding the case found that "meeting an additional specification" for line pipe "does not strip away the qualification of these pipes as standard pipes" (see 2405150027).