The Court of International Trade on Oct. 9 sustained the Commerce Department's decision, made on remand, to exclude seven types of magnesia carbon bricks imported by Fedmet Resources from the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on magnesia carbon bricks from China. While the petitioner, the Magnesia Carbon Bricks Fair Trade Committee, argued that Judge Miller Baker previously misinterpreted a 2014 ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in finding that the addition of any alumina to the bricks excludes them from the orders, Baker was unconvinced. The judge said the petitioner in the underlying AD/CVD investigations explicitly disclaimed the inclusion of bricks with any alumina within the scope of the orders. Baker noted that while this could allow importers to skirt duty liability by merely adding tiny amounts of alumina, affected U.S. producers could turn to anti-circumvention proceedings.
The Court of International Trade announced that Pacer.gov will undergo maintenance Oct. 12 6:55 a.m. to 7 p.m. EDT. During this time, users may experience difficulties when "logging onto CM/ECF and when making payments through Pay.gov."
Court of International Trade Judge Timothy Stanceu joined many of his colleagues in granting the government's motions to stay its case before him, pending the federal government shutdown. Like other CIT judges, Stanceu ordered the government to file a status report within 10 days of the appropriations lapse ending to establish new filing deadlines (see 2510020051).
During oral argument held Sept. 3 at the Court of International Trade, Judge Mark Barnett expressed skepticism about an argument that negative antidumping duty and countervailing duty determinations regarding a product preclude the Commerce Department from starting circumvention inquiries into the same product (SeAH Steel Vina Corp. v. United States, CIT Consol. # 23-00256, -00257, -00258).
Judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit pressed counsel for importer Blue Sky the Color of Imagination and the government during oral argument on Oct. 7 in the importer's customs classification suit on its notebooks with calendars. During the argument, Judges Alan Lourie, Raymond Chen and William Bryson grappled with whether the court is bound by its 2010 ruling in Mead v. U.S. and whether the goods are properly classified as calendars or diaries (Blue Sky The Color of Imagination v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1710).
The Court of International Trade on Oct. 8 remanded a Commerce Department scope ruling that importer Pitts Enterprises' chassis from Vietnam containing Chinese-origin axle and landing gear components fall under the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on chassis and subassemblies thereof from China. Judge Claire Kelly held that Commerce must adopt the "plain meaning of the word 'entered'" in the AD/CVD orders, "namely 'entered into the United States.'" Kelly also rejected the agency's claim that the plain meaning of the orders covers Chinese-origin parts that enter the U.S. as part of a chassis. She found that the orders are ambiguous as to "when components are included within the scope of the Orders." They're also unclear on when third country operations remove these parts from the orders, as well as on the meaning of "subassemblies ... whether ... assembled or unassembled." Lastly, the judge told Commerce to reconsider its decision to impose AD/CVD on the "entire value of the imported chassis" rather than just on the Chinese-origin parts.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Oct. 8 affirmed the Court of International Trade's rejection of the Commerce Department's application of its "cross-ownership regulation" to countervailing duty respondent Gujarat Fluorochemicals in the CVD investigation of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) resin from India. In the investigation, Commerce attributed a subsidy received by Inox Wind to Gujarat, since Inox sold the respondent wind power that constituted only 1.03% of total power consumed by the company.
The following lawsuit was filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
The Commerce Department erred in deciding to "smooth" antidumping duty respondent Prolamsa's production costs in the 2022-23 administrative review of the AD order on heavy walled rectangular carbon welded steel pipes and tubes from Mexico, Prolamsa argued in an Oct. 3 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Productos Laminados de Monterrey v. United States, CIT # 25-00195).
The Commerce Department properly decided on remand not to countervail an exemption from Turkey's Banking and Insurance Transactions Tax on foreign exchange transactions, the Court of International Trade held in an Oct. 6 decision. In upholding the 2023 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on steel concrete reinforcing bar from Turkey, Judge Gary Katzmann also sustained Commerce's decision to use a report from Colliers International as the benchmark for valuing the rent-free lease of land to respondent Kaptan's affiliate Nur over a report from Cushman & Wakefield.