CBP can reasonably interpret facts to establish that an importer is evading antidumping and countervailing duties in an Enforce and Protect Act investigation, and doesn't need to establish that no other conclusion could possibly be drawn from the record in an EAPA case, DOJ told the Court of International Trade in a brief filed May 20 (Leco Supply v. United States, CIT #21-00136).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Plaintiff and exporter Prosperity Tieh Enterprise Co. opposed a group of U.S. steel producers' motion in an antidumping duty case to hold an oral argument, telling the Court of International Trade that the motion is "unnecessary and disingenuous." In the May 20 filing, Prosperity argued that since the case has been going on for six years and the main issue in the case -- the decision to collapse mandatory respondents Yieh Phui Enterprise Co. and Synn Industrial Co. with one of their affiliates, Prosperity -- has been "extensively briefed," the need for oral argument is precluded (Prosperity Tieh Enterprise Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. #16-00138).
Although utilities that are installing wind and solar operations and wind turbine manufacturers would like antidumping duty and countervailing duty laws to change to take public interest into account, panelists at Georgetown Law's International Trade Update acknowledged it will probably never happen.
The Bureau of Industry and Security's upcoming shift in its administrative enforcement policies could signal a more aggressive posture toward cracking down on illegal exports and may change how companies voluntarily disclose violations, a former BIS agent said. But some lawyers say the policies could represent a minor shift, and it may be too early to tell how they will affect compliance decisions.
The Court of International Trade in a confidential May 19 opinion remanded the Commerce Department's final determination in the countervailing duty investigation on carbon and alloy steel threaded rod from China in a case brought by Chinese exporter Zhejiang Junyue Standard Part Co. The exporter filed the case to contest Commerce's use of adverse facts available over its inability to verify non-use of China's Export Buyer's Credit Program. In a letter on the opinion, Judge Richard Eaton told the parties to review the opinion and tell the court by May 26 if any of the bracketed information should remain confidential or if any non-bracketed information is confidential and should be redacted for the public version (Zhejiang Junyue Standard Part Co. v. United States, CIT #20-00102).
The Court of International Trade in a May 20 order denied plaintiff Koehler Paper's stay motion in antidumping case. The U.S. opposed the stay motion which requested that the case be halted until the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sorted out what to do about the use of the Cohen's d test when detecting masked dumping on the grounds that the impact of a Federal Circuit decision is "speculative at best" (see 2204220041). The U.S. pointed out that resolution of the Federal Circuit case Stupp Corp. v. United States may only affect two legal issues in the case leaving six issues unaffected (Matra Americas LLC v. United States, CIT Consol. #21-00632).
The Committee Overseeing Action for Lumber International Trade Investigations or Negotiations will not be allowed to intervene in GreenFirst Forest Products' case at the Court of International Trade contesting the Commerce Department's decision not to start a changed circumstances review. Per a May 20 opinion at CIT, Judge Claire Kelly said the coalition failed to show that it has a "direct, immediate, or legally protectable interest in this case" or that the U.S. will not adequately represent its interests.
The Court of International Trade ruled in a May 20 opinion that sales from a Canadian warehouse to U.S. customers are "sales for export to the U.S." rather than "domestic sales," in a May 20 slip opinion by Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves. The opinion granted a Nov. 19 motion for summary judgment by DOJ (see 2111220057) that argued plaintiff Midwest-CBK's sales were exports to the U.S. at the time of sale (Midwest-CBK, LLC v. United States, CIT Consol. #17-00154).
The Court of International Trade ruled in a May 20 opinion that sales from a Canadian warehouse to U.S. customers are "sales for export to the U.S." rather than "domestic sales," in a May 20 slip opinion by Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves. The opinion granted a Nov. 19 motion for summary judgment by DOJ (see 2111220057) that argued plaintiff Midwest-CBK's sales were exports to the U.S. at the time of sale (Midwest-CBK, LLC v. United States, CIT Consol. #17-00154).