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 U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Jan. 7 clarified the standard Commerce must follow when determining how high it can set a review respondent’s antidumping duty rate based on adverse inferences. Rejecting a "single sentence" justification for an adverse facts available rate Commerce offered in the final results of a review, it held the department may not drastically depart from accuracy without establishing a "particularly strong need to deter noncompliance" based on record evidence showing unreasonable negligence or intentional misconduct.
Another plaintiff group in a large, branching Vietnamese plywood circumvention investigation case raised exporter-specific arguments Jan. 2 against the Commerce Department’s adverse facts available-based circumvention finding for 20 exporters (Shelter Forest International Acquisition v. United States, CIT Consol. # 23-00144).
CBP will liquidate importer Neo Chemicals & Oxides' mixed oxide products using a "first sale" transaction valuation method, the government and importer said in a stipulated judgment. Submitting the stipulation to the Court of International Trade on Jan. 6, the parties said the company's entries "will be appraised under the transaction value method based on the prices the middleman paid to the manufacturer." Neo brought the suit in 2021 seeking first sale valuation of its goods classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule headings 3815 and 2846 (see 2108190065) (Neo Chemicals & Oxides v. United States, CIT # 21-00453).
3D importer Quantified Operations on Jan. 5 asked the Court of International Trade to compel discovery in its classification case. The importer said the government was trying to hide behind the deliberative process privilege without meeting the procedural requirements for it (Quantified Operations Limited v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 22-00178).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held Jan. 7 that the Commerce Department can't significantly depart from accuracy when setting adverse facts available rates without showing a "particularly strong need to deter noncompliance." Rejecting the department's single-sentence justification for a 154.33% AFA AD rate, it said Commerce was required to look to record evidence and evaluate "common factors" such as intent, recidivism or unreasonable carelessness when setting an unusually high rate.
The Court of International Trade will be closed Jan. 9 in observance of the national day of mourning for the late President Jimmy Carter, the court announced. The day will be considered a "legal holiday" for the purposes of computing time and motions to enlarge time under the court's Rule 6.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Parties filed a stipulated judgment Jan. 3 for a 2012 case regarding imported light-sensitive materials used in photography (Tokyo Ohka Kogyo America v. United States, CIT # 12-00261).
After a remand, the Commerce Department continued to find the downstream products of Mexican pipe exporter Maquilacero S.A. de C.V. and auto-parts manufacturer Tecnicas de Fluidos S.A. de C.V. (TEFLU) were covered by an antidumping duty order on light-walled rectangular pipe and tube (Maquilacero S.A. de C.V. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 23-00091).