Court of International Trade

The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's decision in the 15th antidumping administrative review of fish fillets from Vietnam that I.D.I. International Development and Investment Corp. failed to rebut the presumption of government control, in a July 6 order. The opinion in the case is confidential and will remain as such until Judge M. Miller Baker considers redactions for business confidential information with the litigants. Responses to the confidential opinion are due by July 20.

The Court of International Trade extended to all unassigned cases a preliminary injunction halting the liquidation of unliquidated entries subject to the lists 3 and 4A Section 301 China tariffs for plaintiffs in the litigation challenging the tariffs, CIT said in a July 6 order. Cases challenging the tariffs continue to trickle in to CIT and, pursuant to an April 28 order, are automatically stayed without being assigned to the master litigation. Chief Judge Mark Barnett penned the extension order shortly after dissenting from the decision to issue the preliminary injunction (see 2107060077).

The Commerce Department continues to find that the South Korean government did not provide a countervailable subsidy to producers of hot-rolled steel by way of cheap electricity despite a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit opinion to the contrary, in July 6 remand results. Filing the second remand results of its kind in a second, separate Court of International Trade case brought by POSCO, Commerce held that POSCO's countervailing duty in an investigation into carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from Korea will remain unchanged (POSCO v. United States, CIT #17-00137).

Kazakhstan's Ministry of Trade and Integration will be allowed to intervene in a Court of International Trade countervailing duty case on silicon metal from Kazakhstan, a July 6 order said. In Kazakhstan's initial attempt, Judge Leo Gordon had found the trade ministry failed to comply with court rules governing intervention, including failure to state the issues it wished to litigate. The ministry made the corrections in a “renewed motion to intervene as plaintiff-intervenor” but faced pushback from the petitioners in the CVD case, who argued that the renewed motion was untimely (see 2107060031). The Justice Department did not oppose the ministry's intervention.

Garg Tube Export and Garg Tube Limited want their challenge to the 2018-19 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on welded carbon steel standard pipes and tubes from India in the Court of International Trade stayed pending their appeal in a related case over the existence of a particular market situation for hot-rolled coil in India. The Federal Circuit appeal will also address the Commerce Department's application of adverse facts available due to the plaintiffs' unaffiliated vendor's failure to submit costs of production data. Garg's July 6 motion to stay received the consent of the two defendant-intervenors, Nucor Tubular Products and Wheatland Tube, but will meet opposition from the Justice Department (Garg Tube Export LLP et al. v. United States, CIT #21-00169).

The Court of International Trade stayed a tariff classification case over printed circuit board assemblies used in audio-visual transmission equipment, in a July 6 order, pending the Justice Department's consideration of a settlement offer from importer Plexus Corp. CIT recently sent the case to trial after it found that it couldn't determine whether PCBAs imported by Plexus are principally used for televisions and dutiable at 2.9% or principally used for other devices, including computers and smartphones, and duty free (see 2012230084).

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with some recent top stories. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The Court of International Trade will stop liquidation of unliquidated entries subject to litigation over List 3 and List 4A Section 301 China tariffs, a CIT panel said in a July 6 opinion (Court No. 21-00052). Granting a preliminary injunction, Judges Claire Kelly and Jennifer Choe-Groves held that questions over limitations on CIT's ability to reliquidate the entries or grant a monetary judgment mean the Section 301 plaintiffs risk irreparable harm in the absence of one. Chief Judge Mark Barnett dissented, arguing that the court does have the power to reliquidate, and that the resulting lack of irreparable harm weighed against granting the injunction.

Kazakhstan's Ministry of Trade and Integration wanted to intervene in a countervailing duty case on silicon metal from Kazakhstan in the Court of International Trade in June. It was denied for failing to comply with CIT Rule 24 -- the rules governing intervention. In particular, the defendant-intervenors and petitioners in the underlying CVD case, Globe Specialty Metals and Mississippi Silicon, said the trade ministry failed to state the issues it wanted to litigate (see 2106110029). Now, the ministry is back in CIT, filing a "renewed motion to intervene as plaintiff-intervenor" on June 16 (Tau-Ken Temir LLP et al. v. United States, CIT #21-00173).

By subjecting aluminum extrusion importer Global Aluminum Distributor to two antidumping and countervailing duty evasion investigations for the same conduct and entries, CBP violated Global Aluminum's rights to due process, the importer said. Filing a July 2 complaint in the Court of International Trade, Global Aluminum called out the customs agency for breaking "long-standing principles of fundamental fairness" by including the importer in multiple evasion investigations under the Enforce and Protect Act -- a process already riddled with due process violations, according to the complaint (Global Aluminum Distributor LLC v. United States, CIT #21-00312).