The Court of International Trade on Oct. 25 sustained the International Trade Commission's decision on remand finding imports of Russian seamless pipe are non-negligible as part of the injury determination on the products. Judge M. Miller Baker said the commission adequately relied on data from two unnamed companies for determining the amount of in-scope imports from Germany and Mexico for purposes of the negligibility calculation. The judge added that exporter PAO TMK failed to argue before the ITC that it should have re-opened the record in handling the company's claims.

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 24 said exporter The Ancientree Co. failed to timely raise its ministerial error allegation in an antidumping review on Chinese cabinets, finding that the company didn't file the allegation until after the final results even though the error was present in the preliminary findings. The company said its U.S. price should have been adjusted to account for an alleged subsidy it received from China's Export Buyer's Credit Program that was countervailed in the companion CVD proceeding. Judge Mark Barnett held that none of the exceptions to exhaustion applied.

The Court of International Trade in a decision made public Oct. 23 sustained the Commerce Department's rejection of eight Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion requests from importer Seneca Foods Corp. Judge Gary Katzmann said the rejections were backed by substantial evidence after Commerce addressed various emails submitted by Seneca to show U.S. Steel's alleged inability to make tin mill products in sufficient quantity to satisfy the importer's needs. Katzmann added that Commerce's focus on "prospective evidence of steel production" is in line with the tariff's purpose and effect.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Oct. 23 affirmed CBP's classification of steel tubing with a thin interior coating mainly made of epoxy, melamine and silicon additives under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 7306, which covers certain iron or steel tubes and pipes. Judges Richard Taranto, Todd Hughes and Tiffany Cunningham said the goods, imported by Shamrock Building Materials, don't fit under heading 8547, which covers electrical conduit tubing lined with insulating material because the heading requires "commercially significant insulation of the conduit against current flow" -- which Shamrock's tubing doesn't have. The result is a 25% Section 232 tariff on the imports.

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 21 remanded the Commerce Department's 2020 review of the countervailing duty order on rebar from Turkey. Judge Gary Katzmann said Commerce failed to support its finding that exporter Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret's exemption from Turkey's 0.2% Banking and Insurance Transactions Tax on foreign exchange transactions was de jure specific, noting the agency didn't establish the tax exemption was limited by enterprise or industry. Katzmann also sent back Commerce's rejection of a report prepared by Cushman & Wakefield to value land used for free by Kaptan's affiliated supplier. The judge said Commerce didn't base its rejection of the report "on a sound legal basis."

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 15 partially granted importer Cozy Comfort Co.'s motions to exclude the testimony of witnesses offered by the government in a customs classification spat on The Comfy, a wearable blanket. Judge Stephen Vaden said the testimony of fashion industry professional Patricia Concannon should be limited to topics pertaining to the "sale, marketing, and merchandising of apparel," as opposed to the design of The Comfy. The judge also limited the testimony of CBP national import specialist Renee Orsat, ruling that she "may not testify about opinions she formed during the Customs' classification process." In addition, Vaden denied the government's bid to exclude expert testimony from outerwear designer James Crumley, who was offered as a witness by Cozy Comfort. The judge rejected the government's attacks on Crumley's reliability as a witness.

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 10 rejected the Commerce Department's use of partial adverse facts available against exporter Nippon Steel for failing to submit certain U.S. sales data from an affiliated buyer in the third review of the antidumping duty order on hot-rolled steel flat products from Japan. Judge Stephen Vaden said Commerce failed to grapple with the company's claim that Japanese law barred it from obtaining the information, undercutting the notion that Nippon Steel failed to act to the best of its ability in responding to the agency's requests. Vaden also sustained Commerce's deduction of Section 232 duties from Nippon Steel's U.S. price in the third, fourth and fifth reviews of the AD order, noting that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has already sustained the agency's ability to take such action.

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 11 sustained the Commerce Department's remand results in a case on the antidumping duty investigation on polyester textured yarn from Indonesia, dropping the AD rate for respondent PT. Asia Pacific Fibers TBK from 26.07% to 9.2%. On remand, Commerce allowed Asia Pacific to fix errors in its submissions. The respondent provided requested translations and a "narrative explanation of its reporting methodologies," allowing the agency to reconcile the company's sales and cost reporting. No party contested the result.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said Oct. 10 that Canadian lumber exporter J.D. Irving was trying to avoid review by a binational panel by bringing its antidumping duty case to the Court of International Trade under 28 U.S.C. 1581(i) jurisdiction rather than 1581(c). It said that the “true nature” of the exporter’s action was opposition to an AD rate it received in 2019, not the Commerce Department’s subsequent instruction to CBP, as J.D. Irving didn’t participate in the 2020 review. It also said that a binational panel had the power to provide J.D. Irving relief, if warranted (J.D. Irving v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1652).

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 8 sustained the Commerce Department's inclusion of importer Printing Textile's "Canvas Banner Matisse" under the scope of the antidumping duty order on artist canvas from China. Judge Timothy Stanceu held that Commerce's interpretation of one "ambiguous" sentence in the scope language wasn't "per se unreasonable" and that the agency didn't fail to consider or misapply the (k)(1) factors at issue. The judge added that the order's language wasn't constitutionally vague to the point where an importer of the canvas banner wouldn't reasonably expect its products not to be covered by the order.