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 in a May 20 opinion denied the right to intervene in a countervailing duty case for the Committee Overseeing Action for Lumber International Trade Investigations or Negotiations. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves ruled that the coalition does not have a right to intervene in the action since it has not shown it has a "direct, immediate, or legally protectable interest in this case" or that the U.S. will not adequately represent its interests. The judge also said that it will not let the coalition intervene since it fails to show that it shares a defense to plaintiff GreenFirst's claims since it doesn't sufficiently allege that it will be adversely affected by a decision in the case. GreenFirst filed the case to contest the Commerce Department's decision to not start a changed circumstances review of the CVD order on softwood lumber from Canada.
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 dismissed two cases brought by steel importer Voestalpine USA and steel purchaser Bilstein Cold Rolled Steel seeking to retroactively apply a Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion that was originally issued with a clerical error. Judge Mark Barnett said that the plaintiffs did not seek any relief that the court could grant since the entries eligible for the exclusion had already been liquidated, and the court does not have the power to order their reliquidation.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade dismissed two cases brought by steel importer Voestalpine USA and steel purchaser Bilstein Cold Rolled Steel seeking to retroactively apply a Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion that was originally issued with a clerical error. Judge Mark Barnett said that the plaintiffs did not seek any relief that the court could grant since the entries eligible for the exclusion had already been liquidated, and the court does not have the power to order their reliquidation.
South Korean exporter Husteel Co. challenged the Commerce Department's decision to use one antidumping duty mandatory respondent's third-country sales to calculate another mandatory respondent's constructed value profit, selling expenses and constructed export price profit. Filing its complaint on May 16 at the Court of International Trade, Husteel, a non-examined company in the relevant AD review, also argued that Commerce violated the law in its application of neutral facts available over the calculation of one of the respondent's U.S. affiliate's yield loss on further manufacturing operations (Husteel Co., Ltd. v. United States, CIT #22-00143).