The Court of International Trade improperly upheld CBP's incorrect classification of conduit tubing imported from Mexico as steel tubing instead of insulated fittings, Shamrock Building Materials said in its June 5 opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Shamrock Building Materials v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1648)

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit should deny Oman Fasteners' bid to dismiss Mid Continent's appeal of a Court of International Trade opinion which consolidated a motion for an injunction on antidumping duty cash deposits with a motion for judgment, saying the motion to dismiss is a “revisionist version of the record and applicable statutes, regulations, and judicial precedent” and isn't accurate, Mid Continent said in a reply brief June 6 (Oman Fasteners v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1661).

The Court of International Trade remanded aspects of the final results of the Commerce Department's less-than-fair-value investigation of raw honey from Argentina, finding that Commerce's decision to use exporter Nexco's acquisition costs as a proxy for Argentinian beekeeper's production costs and its decision to compare Nexco's third-country sales and U.S. sales were not properly explained. However, the court did agree with Commerce's decision to compare Nexco's costs on a monthly basis for the purposes of the sales below cost test and sustained that aspect of the final determination.

The Court of International Trade on June 7 upheld the Commerce Department's classification of the surrogate values for aluminum ash byproduct and rolling oil inputs in the first antidumping duty administrative review on aluminum foil from China, as well as the agency's decision to use Maersk data to calculate surrogate freight costs and its refusal to grant respondent Jiangsu Zhongji Lamination Materials Co. a double remedies adjustment for input subsidies the respondent said were countervailable.

The Commerce Department's decision to use Afghanistan as a comparison market for India in the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain lined paper products from India was flawed and resulted in skewed margins for respondent Cellpage and the non-selected respondents, a group of U.S. manufacturers said in a June 5 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Prices in Afghanistan were not representative and should not have been the basis for normal value, Association of American School Paper Suppliers (AASPS) argued as it asked the court to remand the results back to Commerce (Association of American School Paper Suppliers v. U.S., CIT # 23-00102).

The Court of International Trade granted a request by antidumping respondent Ellwood City Forge to reply to remand comments in an antidumping duty investigation on forged steel fluid end blocks from Germany. CIT Judge Stephen Vaden granted the May 15 request over objections by both DOJ and intervenor Edelstahl Siegen (Ellwood City Forge v. U.S., CIT # 21-00077).

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.

The Commerce Department's new methodology for evaluating compliance with a 2019 antidumping duty suspension agreement's requirement to eliminate 85% of dumping has forced industry players to "bet their compliance" on "speculation and estimation," exporter International Greenhouse Produce (IGP) argued in a complaint at the Court of International Trade. The exporter added that Commerce also erred by "treating certain transactions involving U.S. brokers as U.S. sales," jettisoning the definition of "broker" seemingly settled in the 1960s (International Greenhouse Produce v. U.S., CIT # 23-00093).

The Court of International Trade on June 7 remanded the Commerce Department's antidumping investigation on raw honey from Argentina. CIT Judge Claire Kelly remanded the department's decision to use Nexco's acquisition costs as a proxy for Argentinian beekeeper's production costs and its decision to compare Nexco's third-country sales and U.S. sales. However, the court did agree with Commerce's decision to compare Nexco's costs on a monthly basis for the purposes of the sales-below cost test and sustained that aspect, saying that Commerce reasonably explained its decision.

The Court of International Trade on June 7 upheld the Commerce Department's first antidumping duty administrative review on aluminum foil from China. Judge M. Miller Baker sustained Commerce's classification of surrogate values for aluminum dross/ash byproduct and rolling oil and rolling oil additive inputs, along with the agency's selection of Maersk data to calculate freight costs. The judge also upheld Commerce's decision not to grant a double remedies adjustment for subsidies to inputs that respondent Jiangsu Zhongji Lamination Materials Co. said were countervailable. Lastly, Baker rejected Zhongji's bid to have Commerce modify its liquidation instructions to include the phrase "resold or imported."