Another ball bearings exporter threw its complaint into the ring March 5 to contest a recent antidumping duty administrative review. It alleged that the Commerce Department unnecessarily applied partial adverse facts available and needlessly conducted a pricing differential analysis for the mandatory respondent (Zhejiang Jingli Bearing Technology Co. v. U.S., CIT # 24-00038).
The Court of International Trade last week ordered a hearing in a countervailing duty injury case on whether any party violated the court's rules regarding the bracketing of confidential information, suggesting that Rule 11 sanctions were on the table.
The Court of International Trade on March 6 sustained the Commerce Department's fourth remand results excluding Star Pipe Products' ductile iron flanges from the antidumping duty order on cast iron pipe fittings from China.
Importer Sucden Americas Corp. and the U.S. filed a stipulation of dismissal in a customs suit pertaining to the company's four entries of white refined sugar from Guatemala. The U.S. moved to dismiss the lawsuit in December, arguing that the case must be tossed because the importer didn't protest the liquidation of its entries or the denials of its post-importation preference claims (see 2312110045). As a result, the government said there was no subject-matter jurisdiction in the suit under Section 1581(a) (Sucden Americas Corp. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00228).
A group of steel nail exporters led by PT Enterprise will appeal a February Court of International Trade decision sustaining the Commerce Department's use of a simple average of standard deviations in the denominator of the Cohen's d test in detecting "masked" dumping as part of the antidumping duty investigation on steel nails from Taiwan (see 2402120036). The companies will take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, where the Cohen's d test is being litigated in a lead case, Stupp Corp. v. U.S. The government's central contention in the present case is that Commerce's use of the full population of data precludes it from needing to satisfy statistical assumptions such as the normal variance of data (Mid Continent Steel and Wire v. U.S., CIT # 15-00213).
Three importers said in combined remand comments that CBP was attempting to illegally shift the burden of proof onto them to prove they weren't guilty of evasion under the Enforce and Protect Act (Newtrend USA Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00347).
The U.S. filed another brief supporting its motion to dismiss a case involving the liquidation of entries that were the subject of a prior disclosure, which it argues the Court of International Trade has no jurisdiction to hear (Larson-Juhl US v. U.S., CIT # 23-00032).
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. on March 4 opposed exporter Chandan Steel Limited's motion for reconsideration of the Court of International Trade's order sustaining the company's adverse facts available rate in the 2018-19 antidumping duty review on stainless steel flanges from India. The government argued that the court properly found it didn't need to resolve certain issues pertaining to Chandan's allocation method for reporting its costs of production and that Chandan failed to show any "manifest error" in the court's decision to sustain the use of AFA based on the exporter's inadequate reporting of comparison market window period sales (Kisaan Die Tech Private, Ltd. v. United States, CIT # 21-00512).
The Court of International Trade in a decision made public March 5 sustained the Commerce Department's use of exporter Nexco's acquisition costs as a proxy for its suppliers' costs of production in the antidumping duty investigation on raw honey from Argentina.