The Court of International Trade in a July 19 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's decision to assign exporter Double Coin Holdings the 105.31% China-wide antidumping duty rate in an administrative review of the AD order on off-the-road tires from China. Judge Timothy Stanceu said the decision complies with the court's previous decision finding that Double Coin did not rebut the presumption of Chinese state control over its export activities. No parties commented on the remand results.
Country of origin cases
The World Trade Organization's published agenda for the Dispute Settlement Body's July 28 meeting includes U.S. status reports on the implementation of DSB recommendations on antidumping measures on certain hot-rolled steel products from Japan; antidumping and countervailing measures on large residential washers from South Korea; certain methodologies and their application to antidumping proceedings involving China; and Section 110(5) of the U.S. Copyright Act. Status reports are also expected from Indonesia on measures related to the import of horticultural products, animals and animal products, and from the EU on measures affecting the approval and marketing of biotech products.
The Court of International Trade in a July 20 opinion granted the government's motion to toss Target's case seeking to invalidate a CIT order instructing CBP reliquidate Target's metal-top iron tables at the 72.29% dumping rate instead of the original 9.47% rate. Judge Leo Gordon said that were Target to succeed, the result would "turn the clock back over 40 years" prior to the Customs Court Act's passage and "again call into question whether a party before the Court could obtain full and complete relief." Reversing the order as Target requests would "elevate the principle of finality" of liquidation "over the inherent power" of the trade court under Article III of the Constitution, the judge said.
The partial revocation of an antidumping duty order for a Turkish company should have meant that company's export volumes were to be excluded from a sunset review of the AD order, Turkish steelmaker Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari (Erdemir) argued in a July 14 motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade (Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari v. U.S. International Trade Commission, CIT # 22-00351).
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative exceeded its authority in imposing the lists 3 and 4A Section 301 tariffs on China, covering a total of $320 billion worth of Chinese imports, plaintiff-appellants in the massive case against the duties, led by HTMX Industries and Jasco Products Co., argued in their opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Appealing the Court of International Trade's decision upholding the tariffs (see 2204010061), the companies said USTR did not have the authority to set the duties since the authority was not directly delegated by Congress, in violation of the "major questions doctrine" (HMTX Industries v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1891).
The Commerce Department shouldn't have rejected a questionnaire response in an antidumping duty investigation on utility scale wind towers from Spain, considering that the agency relied on responses from the relevant company on remand, Siemens Gemesa Renewable Energy argued in its July 17 remand comments at the Court of International Trade (Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy v. U.S., CIT # 21-00449).
Vadim Konoshchenok, a Russian citizen allegedly linked to Russia's Federal Security Service, appeared before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York on July 14 on charges of conspiracy related to a "global procurement and money laundering" scheme to benefit the Russian state, the U.S. Attorney's Office for that district announced. He faces a maximum of 30 years in prison.
The Commerce Department ignored evidence against an objector's claim that it could provide domestic tin mill products to make up the shortfall when it denied Section 232 exclusion requests for tin mill products by Seneca Foods, the company continued to argue during July 11 oral arguments at the Court of International Trade (Seneca Foods Corp. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00243).
The Commerce Department shouldn't have relied on adverse facts available in an antidumping duty review on tapered roller bearings from China for a fully cooperative entity that attempted to obtain information from its suppliers but couldn't secure their cooperation, Chinese bearing exporter Shanghai Tainai Bearing said in a July 13 motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade. Court precedent doesn't require a party to provide information not in its possession and which it can't reasonably obtain, the company said (Shanghai Tainai Bearing v. U.S., CIT # 23-00020).
Kazakh exporter Tau-Ken Temir filed a corrected version of its opening brief in a countervailing duty case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit after the court rejected the company's efforts to add new claims to its originally filed brief (see 2306300060). The government and petitioners Globe Specialty Metals and Mississippi Silicon fought against the effort to add new claims to the brief, claiming that it was an attempt to shoehorn arguments on the agency's new regulations concerning untimely submitted files. The new brief filed by TKT makes corrections requested by the clerk of the court in a case on the CVD investigation on silicon metal from Kazakhstan in which the Commerce Department used adverse facts available due to a missed filing deadline (Tau-Ken Temir v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-2204).