The Court of International Trade should sustain the Commerce Department's remand results that stuck by the agency's prior finding that importer SMA Surface's "Twilight" surface does not qualify for the crushed glass surface products exclusion from antidumping and countervailing duties on quartz surface products from China (see 2304120063), DOJ said in its June 12 response (SMA Surfaces v. U.S., CIT # 21-00399).

The Court of International Trade ordered that the parties in an antidumping duty case show cause that the court not remand the Commerce Department's decision to grant a constructed export price offset to the mandatory respondents in the 2019-20 administrative review on circular welded non-alloy steel pipe from South Korea. Judge Timothy Reif said "it appears there may be interest" in a remand in light of Commerce's obligations under 19 U.S.C. Section 1677m(d) to promptly inform a respondent to a request for information of the nature of any deficiency in the response and give that respondent a chance to remedy the deficiency (Wheatland Tube v. United States, CIT # 22-00160).

Importer Greentech Energy Solutions is challenging CBP's decision to assess antidumping and countervailing duties on its 2019 imports of solar modules from Vietnam, despite no finding of dumping, subsidization or injury for Vietnam, nor even the existence of an an anti-circumvention inquiry at that time, Greentech said in a June 9 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Greentech Energy Solutions v. United States, CIT # 23-00118).

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

There is no requirement that an importer intentionally evade duties to be hit by an Enforce and Protect Act investigation, the Court of International Trade ruled in a June 13 opinion. Upholding CBP's finding that importers Ikadan System USA and Weihai Gaosai Metal Product Co. evaded the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on steel grating from China, Judge Leo Gordon rejected the importers' claim that the definition of "evasion" requires a finding of some level of culpability.

The Court of International Trade granted three conservation groups' bid to dismiss a suit seeking to compel the Interior Department to respond to a request to certify Mexico had not done enough to curb illegal fishing and trade of the totoaba fish, further threatening the endangered vaquita porpoise. The conservation groups and Interior reached a settlement in April, under which the agency made the certification, which allows the president to impose restrictions on trade with Mexico.

Trailer wheels manufactured by Asia Wheel in Thailand were incorrectly ruled to be within the scope of antidumping and countervailing duty orders on certain steel wheels from China, U.S. importers Trailstar and TexTrail said in a pair of June 9 complaints at the Court of International Trade. Both complaints asked the court to find Commerce's final scope ruling illegal and to remand the ruling to the department (Trailstar v. U.S., CIT # 23-00097, and Textrail v. U.S., CIT # 23-00099).

The Commerce Department's new practice related to questionnaire response extensions supports exporter Tau-Ken Temir's claims against the agency's use of adverse facts available due to missed filing deadlines, TKT told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a notice of supplemental authority (Tau-Ken Temir v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-2204).

The Court of International Trade June 9 upheld the Commerce Department's remand results in a suit on the administrative review of the antidumping duty order covering multilayered wood flooring from China. Judge Richard Eaton sustained the AD review after exporter Jilin Forest Industry Jinqiao Flooring Group Co. signed off on Commerce's redetermination dropping the company's dumping rate to zero. On remand, the agency dropped the presumption the Chinese government controlled Jilin Forest after Eaton questioned whether Commerce could disregard a mandatory respondent's own data in favor of the countrywide nonmarket economy rate (see 2305040061). Jilin Forest counsel Lizbeth Levinson of Fox Rothschild previously told Trade Law Daily an appeal is unlikely, given that it opens up further scrutiny of the agency's NME policy in AD reviews (Jilin Forest Industry Jinqiao Flooring v. U.S., CIT # 18-00191).

The Commerce Department made no changes its margin calculations for antidumping respondent Zinus Indonesia in its June 9 remand results an a case involving an administrative review on mattresses from India, with the agency saying that it fully addressed the Court of International Trade's remand order in the case and was not required to change its calculations if it fully explained its choices (PT. Zinus Global Indonesia v. U.S., CIT # 21-00277).