The Court of International Trade on March 20 sustained the International Trade Commission's decision not to cumulate goods from Brazil with other countries that are part of the five-year sunset review of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on cold-rolled steel flat products from Brazil, China, India, Japan, South Korea and the U.K. Judge Gary Katzmann held that the commission's analysis didn't "engage in impermissibly 'circular' reasoning," the ITC's treatment of Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs didn't impermissibly depart from past agency practice and the commission appropriately explained its decision not to cumulate Brazil's goods.

The Court of International Trade on March 18 said the U.S. government's eight-year delay in demanding surety company Aegis Security Insurance Co. pay a customs bond for Chinese garlic entries was "unreasonable and a breach of contract." Judge Stephen Vaden said that while the six-year statute of limitations runs from the date CBP issues a bill and not the liquidation date, the eight-year delay in issuing the bill violated the "reasonable time requirement," which is an implied contractual term. Vaden also held that Aegis' "impairment of suretyship" defense failed since the surety could have made a claim with its insurer.

The Court of International Trade on March 11 sustained the Commerce Department's remand results excluding importer Crane Resistoflex's ductile iron lap joint flanges from the antidumping duty order on pipe fittings from China. Judge Timothy Stanceu previously remanded the scope ruling on the grounds that it wasn't in a form that could be sustained by the court. Commerce said a Federal Register notice will be published stating that Crane's flanges are outside the order's scope.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on March 7 sustained CBP's classification of importer RKW Klerks' net wrap products used in hay baling machines under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 6005.39.00 as "warp knit fabric," dutiable at 10%, instead of the importer's subheading of 8433.90.50, as "parts" of harvesting machinery. Judges Richard Taranto, Raymond Chen and Tiffany Cunningham said the net wraps are not "parts" as defined by the HTS since the wraps have "additional function outside the machine." The court added that a "consumable" item, "like bullets in a gun," isn't solely meant for use within the machine "simply because it is used exclusively by the machine."

The Court of International Trade on March 6 sustained the Commerce Department's fourth remand results excluding Star Pipe Products' ductile iron flanges from the antidumping duty order on cast iron pipe fittings from China. Judge Timothy Stanceu said that Commerce appropriately considered (k)(1) sources given the uncertainty of whether Star Pipe's flanges plainly fit under the order and that substantial evidence backs the conclusion the flanges aren't subject to the order. The judge also said that the agency didn't base its fourth remand results on the "end use" limitation, as suggested by AD petitioner ASC Engineered Solutions.

The Court of International Trade on March 5 sustained the Commerce Department's remand results in a suit on the antidumping investigation on raw honey from Argentina. Judge Claire Kelly said Commerce properly used exporter Nexco's acquisition costs as a proxy for its suppliers' costs of production. Because the statute emphasizes finding whether the goods are sold at below fair value, the agency's departure from its normal practice of using the suppliers' data is "justified," Kelly said. The judge also upheld Commerce's comparison of Nexco's normal values based on third country sales prices and U.S. sales prices on a monthly, rather than quarterly, basis.

The Court of International Trade on March 1 denied importer Diamond Tools Technology's application for attorney fees in an Enforce and Protect Act lawsuit, finding that "the government was justified in litigating its position" regarding the finding of evasion since the "underlying legal issues were ones of first impression." The issues of whether CBP is bound by the timeline created by the Commerce Department's start of a circumvention inquiry and whether the importer made a "material and false statement or act, or material omission" under EAPA were both novel questions.

The Court of International Trade on Feb. 27 ruled that Chinese exporter Ninestar Corp. wasn't required to exhaust its administrative remedies by appealing to the Forced Labor Enforcement Task Force before challenging its placement on the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List "under the particular facts of this case." But Judge Gary Katzmann denied the exporter's motion for a preliminary injunction against its placement on the Entity List, finding that the company was unlikely to succeed on three of its four claims against its listing.

The Court of International Trade on Feb. 26 remanded the Commerce Department's remand results in a case on the 15th review of the antidumping duty order on frozen fish fillets from Vietnam. Judge M. Miller Baker again sent back Commerce's failure to treat Indonesia as being at the same level of economic development as Vietnam during the surrogate country selection process. The judge also remanded Commerce's failure to consider evidence from petitioner Catfish Farmers of America regarding exporter NTSF Seafoods Joint Stock Co.'s reporting of its product information, though Baker then sustained Commerce's conclusion regarding the moisture content of NTSF's fish.

The Court of International Trade on Feb. 22 remanded the Commerce Department's remand results in the 2019-20 review of the antidumping duty order on xanthan gum from China. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves rejected the agency's continued use of total adverse facts available against exporters Meihua Group International Trading (Hong Kong) and Xinjiang Meihua Amino Acid Co., finding that the companies submitted evidence on the amount of duties it paid as requested by Commerce. Choe-Groves also said the data, submitted 56 days before the review's preliminary results, wasn't untimely. The court also faulted Commerce for continuing to not conduct a collapsing analysis of exporter Deosen Biochemical, ruling that the company wasn't given adequate notice that it could request a new collapsing analysis.