Dismissing Sea Shepherd New Zealand's and Sea Shepherd Conservation Society's challenge of an expired comparability finding for New Zealand's West Coast North Island multispecies set-net and trawl fisheries would allow the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to evade review and take similar action in the future, the conservation groups said in a March 9 brief (Sea Shepherd New Zealand v. U.S., CIT # 20-00112).

The Commerce Department properly found that a type of aluminum sheet imported from Turkey by AA Metals was covered by the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on common alloy aluminum sheet from China, the Court of International Trade ruled in a March 10 opinion.

The Court of International Trade issued a pair of opinions on March 10. In one, brought by Printing Textiles, Judge Timothy Stanceu dismissed the customs action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The company filed the case under Section 1581(i), the court's "residual" jurisdiction, challenging CBP's denial of its protests on its Canvas Banner Matisse coated fabric. Printing Textiles said that the entries weren't subject to the antidumping order and that the Commerce Department had initiated a scope request on the company's imports. Stanceu said jurisdiction could have been available under Section 1581(a) or Section 1581(c) should Commerce find the imports to be in the scope of the order.

The Court of International Trade ruled March 13 that CBP properly classified as steel tubing, not insulating fittings, the carbon steel tubing lined with epoxy coating imported by Shamrock Building Materials. Judge Timothy Stanceu said the "uncontested facts show" that the subject merchandise is not, as Shamrock claimed, insulating material under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 8547 per the meaning of that term as used in the heading's description.

Judge Stephen Vaden of the Court of International Trade said he did not understand why CIT cases involving presidential decisions or constitutional claims are not allowed direct appeals to the Supreme Court. Speaking March 8 on the "Original Jurisdiction" podcast, Vaden detailed the way constitutional claims are heard at CIT and explained how they are different from other federal courts.

A Court of International Trade case concerning the classification of human interface controllers should be suspended under a test case, German multinational technology company Robert Bosch argued in a March 8 motion. The request followed a March 1 test case designation by CIT Judge Timothy Stanceu. Both cases involve the same classification issue and the same material facts, Bosch argued. Separate litigation of each case would raise the possibility of separate judgments, which could yield "very problematic" results, Bosch said (Robert Bosch v. U.S., CIT # 20-00028, # 20-00030).

The Court of International Trade should halt proceedings in an antidumping duty case filed by HiSteel until after the deadline to appeal the trade court's recent decision in Stupp v. U.S., AD petitioner Nucor Tubular Products said in a March 9 motion. In Stupp, CIT said that the Commerce Department adequately addressed all questions raised by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on the use of the Cohen's d test as part of the differential pricing analysis to root out "masked" dumping (see 2302270049) -- a "virtually identical" issue to one argued in HiSteel's case, Nucor said (HiSteel Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00142).

The Court of International Trade in a March 10 upheld the Commerce Department's final scope decision that antidumping and countervailing duty orders on common alloy aluminum sheet from China cover a type of aluminum sheet AA Metals imported from Turkey. Judge Jane Restani ruled Commerce did not just rely on the plain language of the scope alone but considered various (k)(1) factors. AA Metals claimed it wasn't given a chance to remedy a deficiency on the record, leading the agency to include its imports under the orders. Restani said AA Metals' answers had no such deficiencies and Commerce has no obligation to vet corrections every time it makes a decision in conflict with a party's position.

A Court of International Trade ruling that allowed the Commerce Department to use the Cohen's d test as part of its differential pricing analysis to root out masked dumping (see 2302270049) should be given weight in a separate case contesting Commerce's final determination in the antidumping duty investigation on thermal paper from Germany, DOJ said in a March 7 filing at the Court of International Trade. Matra Americas and intervenor Koehler Paper argued in their September motion for judgment that Commerce’s use of the d test was flawed because it fails to take into account assumptions of sample size, distribution, and variance (see 2209160055) (Matra Americas v. United States, CIT # 21-00632).

The Commerce Department correctly applied adverse facts available to Brazilian honey producer Supermel during an antidumping duty investigation on raw honey from Brazil, defendant-intervenors the American Honey Producers Association and the Sioux Honey Association argued in a March 3 response brief at the Court of International Trade. Supermel's December motion for judgment should be tossed because the exporter failed to cooperate in the investigation and was correctly hit with AFA, the intervenors argued (Apiario Diamente Comercial Exportadora v. United States, CIT # 22-00185).