Domestic steel producer Zekelman Industries filed a lawsuit on Oct. 21 in a Washington, D.C., federal court alleging that the Mexican government breached its 2019 agreement with the U.S. to slow imports of Mexican steel products. The company argued that Mexico's breach of the deal "has devastated the U.S. steel industry," forcing the company to close two plants due to the oversupply of cheap steel (Zekelman Industries v. United States, D.D.C. # 24-02992).

The U.S. and importer Katana Racing jointly moved to refer a customs penalty suit to court-annexed mediation before the Court of International Trade following the court's recent decision rejecting Katana Racing's renewed motion to dismiss. The parties said in light of the decision, they "believe that resolution to this litigation could potentially be reached through court-annexed mediation" (U.S. v. Katana Racing, CIT # 19-00125).

The Commerce Department failed to explain its use of an inter-quarter comparison in a differential pricing analysis but not in a margin calculation, despite being told to do so by the Court of International Trade in a remand order, exporters argued Oct. 18 (Universal Tube and Plastic Industries v. U.S., CIT # 23-00113).

The Commerce Department was right to make a Vietnam-wide determination that exporters were circumventing antidumping and countervailing duty orders on solar panels from China on the basis of an affirmative finding for 10 respondents, the U.S. argued Oct. 21 (Trina Solar (Vietnam) Science & Technology Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00228).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Oct. 22 rejected exporter Oman Fasteners' bid to reschedule oral argument currently set for Nov. 7 in its appeal involving an antidumping duty review. Oman Fasteners sought to reschedule the oral argument due to its lawyers' unforeseen scheduling conflict involving a separate case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit (Oman Fasteners v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1661).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Oct. 21 dismissed importer Phoenix Metal Co.'s appeal of CBP's affirmative finding that the company evaded the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on cast iron soil pipe from China by transshipping through Cambodia (see 2406100027). The Court of International Trade rejected Phoenix's due process claims, which faulted CBP for failing to notify the company that it was subject to an interim EAPA investigation, finding that the company failed to allege that it suffered specific-enough arm by being subject to the interim measures without adequate notice (Phoenix Metal Co v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-2222).

The Commerce Department released its remand results Oct. 18 in a case regarding the antidumping duty review on frozen fish fillets from Vietnam, maintaining its earlier determinations but providing more detailed analyses for each (Catfish Farmers of America, et al. v. United States, CIT # 22-00125).

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 18 granted the voluntary dismissal of importer LE Commodities' challenge to the Commerce Department's rejection of its requests for exclusions from Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs (LE Commodities v. U.S., CIT # 23-00220).

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 21 in a confidential decision sustained the Commerce Department's denials of all eight of importer Seneca Foods Corp.'s requests for exclusions from Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs. Judge Gary Katzmann gave the parties until Oct. 22 to review the confidential information in the decision. Katzmann previously remanded the exclusion rejection on the grounds the Bureau of Industry and Security failed to address contradicting evidence that the U.S. industry couldn't timely provide the importer's tin mill products (see 2310180052). On remand, BIS stuck with its rejections of the exclusion requests, finding that U.S. Steel can make the same products in a sufficient quantity and in a timely manner to satisfy Seneca's needs (see 2404020047) (Seneca Foods Corp. v. United States, CIT # 22-00243).

Responding to petitioners’ pushback (see 2409270050) against new results on remand that saw the Commerce Department lower a Brazilian honey exporter’s antidumping duty rate from 83.72% to 10.52%, the U.S. said it supports the results (Apiario Diamante Comercial Exportadora v. United States, CIT # 22-00185).