Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The Court of International Trade on Aug. 12 sustained the Commerce Department's selection of a surrogate financial statement and use of respondent Siam Metal Tech Co.'s invoice date as the date of sale for the respondent's U.S. sales in an antidumping duty proceeding. Sustaining the AD investigation on boltless steel shelving units prepackaged for sale from Thailand, Judge Mark Barnett also upheld the agency's reliance on respondents Bangkok Sheet Metal Public Co.'s and Siam Metal's actual costs that are recorded in their financial accounting systems for the total cost of manufacturing.

The Commerce Department properly included importer Valeo North America's T-series aluminum sheet in the scope of the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on common alloy aluminum sheet from China, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held on Aug. 12. Judges Richard Taranto, Todd Hughes and Kara Stoll disagreed with the importer as to the ambiguity in the orders' scope and on whether its aluminum sheet falls outside the orders' scope, since it's heat-treated.

The Commerce Department on Aug. 8 calculated an individual countervailing duty rate for exporter Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co. on remand in a case on the administrative review of the CVD order on multilayered wood flooring from China for the 2017 review period. Commerce gave Jiangsu Senmao a 2.4% CVD rate in response to an instruction from the Court of International Trade to individually review the respondent (Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co. v. United States, CIT # 20-03885).

The U.S. told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Aug. 11 that stripping the president of his authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act would lead to "ruinous" economic consequences in light of the trade deals reached with the EU, Indonesia, the Philippines, Japan and the U.K. (V.O.S. Selections v. Donald J. Trump, Fed. Cir. # 25-1813).

The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on Aug. 7 largely kept alive a case from importer Eteros Technologies USA and its CEO Aaron McKellar against CBP for allegedly retaliating against the company for winning a customs case at the Court of International Trade. Judge Kymberly Evanson said the court has jurisdiction to review the revocation of McKellar's NEXUS membership, which lets pre-screened travelers accelerate their entrance into the U.S., and that the case isn't mooted by CBP's vacatur of an order banning McKellar from entering the U.S. for five years (Eteros Technologies USA v. United States, W.D. Wash. # 2:25-00181).

The Commerce Department illegally found that the South Korean government's provision of electricity is de facto specific, the Court of International Trade held on Aug. 8. Judge Jane Restani likened electricity provision to other "generally available and widely used" subsidies, such as "roads, bridges, schools, highways," that the agency is barred from countervailing under the CVD statute.

The Commerce Department correctly found that processors and producers of oil country tubular goods weren't double-counted in the agency's domestic production calculation underlying the antidumping duty investigations on OCTG from Argentina, Mexico, South Korea and Russia, the U.S. argued. Filing a reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Aug. 5, the government added that importers led by Tenaris Bay City failed to raise a host of arguments before Commerce they now attempt to bring before the appellate court (Tenaris Bay City v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 25-1382).

A petition from two importers for the Supreme Court to review whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act allows for tariffs will be considered by the high court on Sept. 29. After briefing concluded on whether the Supreme Court should take up the case, the matter was distributed for the court's Sept. 29 conference, where it will determine which cases make up its October 2025 term (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, Sup. Ct. # 24-1287).

The Court of International Trade on Aug. 6 dismissed importer Eteros Technologies USA's case against CBP's alleged retaliation for the importer's success in a previous CIT case concerning the admissibility of its marijuana trimmers. Judge Gary Katzmann said the court doesn't have subject-matter jurisdiction to hear the case, since it doesn't arise out of a "law of the United States providing for" trade-related action.