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.
Court of Federal Appeals Trade activity
Appellants Sigma Corp. and Smith-Cooper International rely too much on industry jargon to argue Vandewater International's steel branch outlets are not butt-welded and aren't subject to the antidumping duty order on butt-weld pipe fittings from China, the U.S. argued in a reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The government said that "a wide array of record evidence contradicts" Sigma and SCI's "core" claim that the term "butt-weld" has a single, unambiguous meaning excluding welded outlets from the scope (Vandewater International v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1093).
DOJ said it recently discovered that it made inaccurate statements in a now-concluded case involving tobacco excise taxes for cigar wrappers, telling the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in an April 21 motion that it said samples of the goods relied on in the case were from from a specific entry when they were not, and that it has only identified the source of six of the nine samples considered by the court (New Image Global v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 19-2444).
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Judge Pauline Newman retained the New Civil Liberties Alliance as counsel in the investigation of her ability to continue serving on the court. The alliance wrote a letter to Chief Judge Kimberly Moore, the judge who brought the case against Newman, requesting that the proceeding be transferred to another circuit and that Newman be fully restored to the court's calendar.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted a U.S. motion for 4,000 more words to file in its reply brief in an appeal of the Commerce Department's finding that Vandewater International's steel branch outlets are within the scope of an antidumping duty order on butt-weld pipe fittings. The government said it needs 18,000 words to address the "volume of information and arguments in the two opening briefs" (see 2304120044). The other parties in the appeal consented to the request (Vandewater International v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1093).
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The Coalition of Freight Coupler Producers refiled a motion to waive the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's redaction limits in a conflict-of-interest proceeding after the court rejected an initial bid to waive the requirements. The coalition asked the court for permission to redact 180 unique words, given that the reasons for redaction are rooted in existing judicial orders and the law, "are narrowly tailored toward" three groups of information grounded in the law and the redaction would not "frustrate the public policy regarding confidentiality in proceedings" at the Federal Circuit (Amsted Rail Company v. ITC, Fed. Cir. # 23-1355).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit stayed the briefing schedule in a countervailing duty case to consider a motion from Spanish olive growers to enlarge their reply brief by 1,500 words. The olive growers, led by Asociacion de Exportadores e Industrialies de Aceitunas de Mesa, asked for the additional words due to the "complexity of the issues presented in this appeal and the fact-specific nature of the arguments raised by the other parties." The case concerns whether the Commerce Department properly made its "substantially dependent finding" in the Spanish olives CVD investigation (see 2303280063) (Asociacion de Exportadores e Industriales de Aceitunas de Mesa v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1162).
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated April 14 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit stayed the briefing schedule in two cases on the Commerce Department's scope ruling excluding certain door thresholds from the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China, pending resolution of a motion to consolidate the appeals. Both cases were appealed by the Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee. In the cases, which were not consolidated at the Court of International Trade, Commerce said door thresholds from Worldwide Door Components and Columbia Aluminum Products qualified for the finished merchandise exclusion. The trade court sustained this finding (Worldwide Door Components v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1532, and Columbia Aluminum Products v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1534).