The Commerce Department drew impossible conclusions with its adverse facts used in the antidumping duty investigation on carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from France, relying on likely sales prices in place of production costs, counsel for Dillinger France said during May 10 oral arguments at the Court of International Trade (Dillinger France v. U.S., CIT # 17-00159).

Arguments from the U.S. and countervailing duty petitioner Coalition for Fair Trade in Ripe Olives related to the Commerce Department's "substantially dependent" finding in the Spanish olives CVD investigation are "part predictable and part remarkable," two Spanish olive growers and a Spanish olive trade group told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a reply brief (Asociacion de Exportadores e Industriales de Aceitunas de Mesa v. United States, Fed Cir. # 23-1162).

Importer Farrier Product Distribution settled its case originally challenging Section 232 steel and aluminum duties on "derivative" products, securing refunds of the duties, the company told the Court of International Trade in a motion to voluntarily dismiss its case. Farrier said the parties sought to "resolve the legal controversy that gave rise to this matter," adding that the U.S. and the importer have been "successful in that effort" (Farrier Product Distribution v. United States, CIT # 20-00098).

Commerce should not have excluded sales of certain cylinders sold by Sahamitr Pressure Container in its home market or used the average-to-transaction (A-T) price comparison method in its calculations, the Thai exporter said in a May 8 complaint to the Court of International Trade. SMPC asked the trade court to declare that Commerce's exclusion of certain cylinders from the calculation as out of scope, as well as and its use of the A-T price comparison method, was in error and to remand the results to Commerce (Sahamitr Pressure Container v. United States, CIT # 23-00077).

The Korean Government's Port Rights Program did not provide Hyundai Steel Company with a countervailable benefit, the company said in its May 8 remand comments at the Court of International Trade (Hyundai Steel Company v. U.S., CIT # 21-00536).

The Court of International Trade erred in failing to grant importer Meyer Corp. first sale treatment when valuing its cookware imports, the importer told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in its opening brief. In one of "two major assignments of error," Meyer said CIT impermissibly rejected first sale prices based on the absence of financial information from Meyer's parent company, Meyer International Holdings (Meyer Corp. v. United States, Fed. Cir. #23-1570).

The Commerce Department illegally failed to revoke the antidumping duty order on softwood lumber from Canada for exporter Resolute FP Canada in the expedited first sunset review of the AD order, the exporter argued in a complaint at the Court of International Trade. The four-count suit says that Commerce unlawfully said Resolute FP was selling merchandise below value via its use of the Cohen's d test, which found the company to be guilty of "masked" dumping, and zeroing (Resolute FP Canada v. United States, CIT # 23-00095).

The Commerce Department filed an unopposed voluntary remand motion at the Court of International Trade in an antidumping duty case so the agency can consider information submitted by respondent Officine Tecnosider on Commerce's use of the quarterly cost methodology. DOJ said it couldn't find Commerce's analysis of the quarterly average prices of steel slab when prepping its reply brief to Officine Tecnosider, leading to the remand request. The trade court set a status conference for May 15 to discuss the motion (Officine Tecnosider v. United States, CIT # 23-00001).

A suit at the Court of International Trade challenging CBP's assessment of antidumping and countervailing duties on imported sinks and kits should be dismissed because the plaintiff failed to pay duties before filing the case, DOJ said in a heavily redacted May 5 motion. DOJ asked the court to dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and to dismiss one count of the complaint for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted (RH Peterson Co. v. U.S., CIT # 20-00099).

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.