Importers and exporters led by Amsted Rail Co. stipulated the dismissal of one of their rail coupler cases and sought to amend their complaint in another Feb. 7 (Amsted Rail Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00242, -00268).

The Commerce Department unreasonably found that a sales-based particular market situation doesn't exist in Turkey, thus erring in picking Turkey as a third country comparison market in the antidumping duty investigation on melamine from Qatar, petitioner Cornerstone Chemical Co. argued in a Feb. 7 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Cornerstone Chemical Co. v. United States, CIT # 25-00005).

Responding to an exporter’s comments on remand results (see 2412230074), the government said Feb. 3 that the Commerce Department fully complied with a second remand order by the Court of International Trade (see 2406270043). The trade court had ordered it to further explain its selection of a second mandatory respondent in a separate rate review on passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China (YC Rubber Co. (North America) v. U.S., CIT # 19-00069).

A domestic steel trade group brought a complaint to the Court of International Trade Feb. 7 alleging that a mandatory respondent in a tire antidumping duty review “was attempting to pass off [a non-market economy] entity as a market-economy entity” and should have been hit with adverse facts available (United Steel, Paper and Forestry International Union v. United States, CIT # 25-00004).

The Commerce Department reasonably picked the financial statements of San Shing Fastech Corp. to calculate the constructed value profit and indirect selling expenses of respondent Your Standing International in a review of the antidumping duty order on nails from Taiwan, the Court of International Trade held in a Feb. 7 decision. Judge Claire Kelly said the agency appropriately found that San Shing makes "comparable merchandise," has contemporaneous financial statements and sells over 70% of its products to markets outside the U.S.

The Court of International Trade CM/ECF system will undergo maintenance March 8 from 8 a.m. to noon ET, the court announced. The system will be unavailable during this time.

The U.S. government fully supported the Commerce Department's decision not to use adverse facts available against exporter Can Tho Import Export Seafood Joint Stock Co. in the 2020-21 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on frozen fish fillets from Vietnam, the exporter argued in a Feb. 5 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. Can Tho Import Export said Commerce properly found that the respondent fully cooperated in the review and that Commerce correctly rejected the petitioner's allegation of a ministerial error (Catfish Farmers of America v. United States, CIT # 24-00082).

The Commerce Department should have deducted a German thermal paper exporter's interest accrued from unpaid antidumping duties from that exporter’s constructed export price, domestic producer Domtar argued Jan. 31 (see 2408010048) (Domtar Corp. v. United States, CIT # 24-00113).

Rail coupler importer Strato Feb. 1 filed a motion for remand for reconsideration of an injury investigation, alleging “newly emerged evidence of fraud perpetuated by the domestic industry” (Wabtec Corp. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 23-00157).

The Court of International Trade on Feb. 7 sustained the Commerce Department's use of San Shing Fastech Corp.'s financial statements to calculate the constructed value profit and indirect selling expenses for respondent Your Standing International in an antidumping duty review on steel nails from Taiwan. Judge Claire Kelly said Commerce reasonably supported its selection after considering that San Shing made comparable merchandise, had contemporaneous financial statements and made over 70% of its sales to markets outside the U.S. The judge also said that Your Standing failed to exhaust its administrative remedies when arguing that the respondent and San Shing lacked a similar customer base.