CIT Says Commerce Didn't Improperly 'Relitigate' Negative Injury Finding on Rail Couplers
The Commerce Department did not improperly "relitigate" a previous negative injury finding on freight rail couplers from China when it conducted its antidumping and countervailing duty investigations into the same products less than two years after negative injury determination, the…
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.
Court of International Trade held on Dec. 23. Judge Gary Katzmann said the scope of the previous and present AD/CVD proceedings are different in three key ways: they cover different physical merchandise, concern different countries of origin and cover different periods of review, sufficiently distinguishing the proceedings. However, Katzmann remanded the AD/CVD investigations on the basis that Commerce improperly disclaimed the authority to modify the orders' scope language based on an argument from importer Wabtec that the petitioner's theory of injury isn't cognizable regarding freight rail couplers that are imported attached to new rail cars.