The Commerce Department failed to justify its de facto specificity finding regarding the South Korean government's provision of electricity below cost in the 2021 review of the countervailing duty order on cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate from South Korea, the Court of International Trade held in a decision made public Dec. 17. Judge Claire Kelly said Commerce didn't lay out a "rational basis" for grouping certain industries together and declaring that the selected industries received a disproportionate benefit from the program.

The Commerce Department failed to consider whether importer Hardware Resources' edge-glued wood boards were wood mouldings and millwork products when it included the goods in the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on wood mouldings and millwork products from China, the Court of International Trade held on Dec. 16. In his first decision since joining the court, Judge Joseph Laroski said Commerce "ignored the threshold question of whether the product at issue is a wood moulding or millwork product."

The Court of International Trade upheld Dec. 17 the Commerce Department’s decision to swap back to the model match methodology it had used earlier in a review of antidumping duty orders on superabsorbent polymers from South Korea. The change meant administrative review mandatory respondent LG Chem’s AD rate jumped back up, from 17.64% to 26.05%.

The Court of International Trade in a confidential decision sustained the results of the Commerce Department's antidumping duty investigation on pentafluoroethane (R-125) from China. Judge Richard Eaton gave the parties until Dec. 31 to review the confidential information in the decision. The suit was launched by three Chinese exporters to claim that Commerce illegally valued the factors of production of the intermediate product for a refrigerant, anhydrous hydrofluoric acid, instead of valuing the acid's reported factors of production (see 2210270069) (Zhejiang Sanmei Chemical Ind. Co. v. United States, CIT #22-00103).

The Court of International Trade rejected U.S. Steel Corp.'s bid to redact portions of the court's recent decision remanding 31 Section 232 exclusion requests. Judge M. Miller Baker said a showing of good cause alone isn't enough to shield discovery materials after they have been introduced at trial or submitted "in connection with dispositive motions," noting the need for transparency in the judicial system and presumption of public access to court proceedings.

The Commerce Department failed to consider whether U.S. Steel Corp. had the capacity to fill the aggregate of importer California Steel Industries' Section 232 steel tariff exclusion requests as opposed to just assessing whether U.S. Steel could fill all of them individually, the Court of International Trade held on Nov. 13. Judge M. Miller Baker added that Commerce didn't address its concession that it couldn't timely supply more slab than contracted for with California Steel.

Court of International Trade Judge Thomas Aquilino upheld the Commerce Department’s redetermination on remand that set at 26.05% the antidumping rate for exporter LG Chem’s superabsorbent polymers. On remand, the department switched back to a model match methodology it had used for the review’s preliminary redetermination, saying not enough evidence on the record supported the one used in its final determination (The Ad Hoc Coalition of American SAP Producers v. U.S., CIT # 23-00010).

Court of International Trade Judge Gary Katzmann again remanded parts of the Commerce Department remand results on the eighth administrative review of the antidumping duty order on xanthan gum from China. He also granted in part a U.S. motion to dismiss in his Dec. 16 decision.

The U.S. brought a negligence case Dec. 9 seeking more than $10 million in unpaid duties and damages against Iron Mule, a Missouri-based importer of equipment parts used in methane and oil field operations (U.S. v. Iron Mule Products, CIT # 24-00222).

The Commerce Department ignored court precedent when it found magnesia carbon bricks from China that contained alumina were subject to antidumping and countervailing duties, the Court of International Trade said in a decision issued Dec. 12.