The Court of International Trade remanded the Commerce Department's 2018 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on rebar from Turkey. Judge Gary Katzmann said that, with respect to Commerce's attribution to respondent Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret of subsidies received by affiliated ship building company Nur Gemicilik ve Tic, the agency didn't adequately explain its finding Nur was a cross-owned input supplier of primarily dedicated inputs. Commerce erroneously said that since it previously found that "scrap" is an input primarily dedicated to the production of downstream steel products, "it is a matter of routine." Katzmann ruled this prior decision was fact-specific and not applicable to the present case.
The Commerce Department has the statutory authority to conduct expedited countervailing duty reviews, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held April 25. Reversing a Court of International Trade ruling concerning imports of certain softwood lumber products from Canada, Judges Timothy Dyk, Jimmie Reyna and Richard Taranto said that authority for the review process is found in the Uruguay Round Agreement Act's enactment of certain provisions that favor individual company determinations and the URAA's "grant of regulatory-implementation power to Commerce." Taranto, the opinion's author, added that logically, it is clear why an expedited process may be needed to ensure that the individualized determination preference of the statute is implemented.
The Commerce Department legally refused to adjust its model-match method related to coding for pasta's protein content in the 2018-19 review of the antidumping duty order on pasta from Italy, the Court of International Trade ruled. Respondent La Molisana said the agency's "breakpoint" of 12.5% protein content did not reflect the market reality, offering evidence that showed the true point separating premium from regular pasta was 13.5% protein content. Judge Richard Eaton said the company's evidence, while unrebutted, was not applicable industry-wide, making it "unreliable and insufficient."
The Court of International Trade remanded a Commerce Department scope ruling that found that two-ply panels imported from China to Vietnam fell under the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on hardwood plywood from China. Judge Mark Barnett said the scope language and the (k)(1) sources confirm the unambiguous meaning of the orders' scope, which excludes the two-ply panels. The court also upheld Commerce's rejection of Interglobal Forest's initial and rebuttal scope comments and ordered that Vietnam Finewood Co. be dismissed from the case since the company dissolved in 2019.
The Court of International Trade on April 19 remanded the final results of an antidumping duty review on xanthan gum for the Commerce Department to reconsider its use of adverse facts available when it assigned a dumping rate of 154.07% to Chinese producer Meihua Group, its separate rate calculation for two other respondents, and whether it could combine Deosen Biochemical Ltd. and Deosen Biochemical (Ordos) Ltd. into a single entity. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said Commerce failed to fulfill its statutory obligation by not swiftly informing Meihua of a deficiency in its submission before determining it failed to cooperate.
Correction: The Court of International Trade on April 19 remanded the final results of an antidumping duty review on xanthan gum for the Commerce Department to reconsider its use of adverse facts available when it assigned a dumping rate of 154.07% to Chinese producer Meihua Group, its separate rate calculation for two other respondents, and whether it could combine Deosen Biochemical Ltd. and Deosen Biochemical (Ordos) Ltd. into a single entity. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said Commerce failed to fulfill its statutory obligation by not swiftly informing Meihua of a deficiency in its submission before determining it failed to cooperate.
The Court of International Trade upheld in part and sent back in part the Commerce Department's remand results in a case on the 2018-19 antidumping duty review on uncoated paper from Brazil. Judge Gary Katzmann ruled Commerce properly found that respondent Suzano's derivative losses were not investment losses or extraordinary. Suzano had said the losses were extraordinary and thus should be excluded from its costs of production.
The Court of International Trade dismissed a suit from SXP Schultz Xtruded Products seeking a refund of Section 232 duties on four different entries for which an exclusion was granted, saying the case lacked subject-matter jurisdiction under Section 1581(i), the court's "residual" jurisdiction. Judge Jennier Choe-Groves said SXP would have had jurisdiction under Section 1581(a) if it filed a protest to contest CBP's liquidation of the entries. The judge noted the contradiction in SXP's arguments on the futility of filing a protest since the importer timely filed a protest for a fifth entry of the same goods, leading to a refund of the Section 232 steel and aluminum duties.
The Court of International Trade upheld the Commerce Department's final results in the 2019 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on corrosion-resistant steel goods from South Korea. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said Commerce legally found that the South Korean government's provision of electricity was for less than adequate remuneration but did not confer a benefit. The agency permissibly analyzed whether the electricity prices paid by all companies, including the two CVD respondents, were consistent with market principles and supported its decision with substantial evidence, the judge said.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the Commerce Department's decision that antidumping respondent Zhejiang Machinery Import & Export Corp. was not entitled to a separate duty rate in the 2016-17 administrative review of the AD order on tapered roller bearings from China since the company did not rebut the presumption of de facto state control. Judges Sharon Prost, Jimmie Reyna and Todd Hughes ruled the decision was reasonable since a labor union, which is affiliated with the Chinese government, is the majority shareholder of Zhejiang "and has overlapping membership with the employee stock-ownership committee."