Consolidated Plaintiff Voluntarily Dismisses Charges in Pipe Fittings Case
Two plaintiffs said in a March 18 filing that they are voluntarily dismissing their complaints in a case regarding a Commerce Department Enforce and Protect Act covered merchandise inquiry (see 2403200072), saying the issue they raised had become simply an "academic" question (Tube Forgings of America, Inc. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 23-00231).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
That inquiry held that a Vietnamese exporter's “rough” pipe fittings were different than “unfinished” pipe fittings and therefore not within the scope of an antidumping duty order on Chinese carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings. The plaintiffs, importers International Piping & Procurement Group and Norca Industrial Company, brought their suits arguing that Commerce conducted an incorrect substantial transformation analysis when it found that the exporter’s unfinished pipe fittings were covered by the order (see 2311020020.
An attorney for International Piping said the two plaintiffs had "challenged Commerce’s ruling on this scenario as a precautionary measure" to narrow the scope of Commerce's inquiry, as the department was looking into a processing procedure their Vietnamese manufacturer didn't use. However, CBP found in a remand redetermination that neither importer had evaded the order, rendering their claims unnecessary.
Their cases had been consolidated with another, Tube Forgings of America, Inc. v. U.S., in January. That claim was brought by several domestic petitioners that argue that both the “rough” and “unfinished” pipe fittings should be covered by the AD order.
International Piping and Norca said they will remain on the case as defendant-intervenors.