The Court of International Trade in a Feb. 13 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's decision to find that exporter Cheng Shin Rubber Ind. Co.'s tires do not qualify for an exclusion to the antidumping duty order on light truck spare tires despite the petitioner originally agreeing to include specific exclusion language for Cheng Shin's tires. Judge Stephen Vaden said that it is not his job "to save Cheng Shin from itself," given that the negotiated exclusion required that the tires must be "designed and marketed exclusively" as temporary-use light truck tires, and Cheng Shin submitted evidence showing that its tires were not exclusively designed and marketed as such.

The Court of International Trade in a Feb. 13 order granted importer Strato's voluntary dismissal notice without prejudice in its customs case on selective cushioning units. While the U.S. did not serve an answer nor a motion for summary judgment in the case, Strato's counsel discussed with the government's counsel and agreed to voluntarily dismiss the case, the order said (Strato v. United States, CIT # 22-00315).

Imports of seamless carbon and alloy steel standard, line and pressure pipe from Russia were not negligible, argued the ITC and defendant-intevenors U.S. Steel and Vallourec Star in two separate responses to a proposed remand order by Russian importer TMK (PAO TMK v. United States, CIT # 21-00532).

The Court of International Trade in a paperless order Feb. 13 denied plaintiff Oman Fasteners' bid to fix mistakes in its motion to take judicial notice in an antidumping duty case. AD petitioner Mid Continent Steel & Wire opposed the motion on the grounds it was the second time in under a month the exporter asked the trade court for leave to address problems in one of its briefs. Judge M. Miller Baker issued the order (Oman Fasteners v. United States, CIT # 22-00348).

The Court of International Trade should dismiss a government counterclaim that its boronized steel tubes, originally classified by CBP as duty-free U.S. goods returned after repairs or alterations, are unfinished steel tubes subject to Section 301 tariffs, Maple Leaf Marketing argued in a Feb. 10 brief. The counterclaim runs against the principle of finality of liquidation, the importer said (Maple Leaf Marketing v. U.S., CIT # 20-03839).

The Commerce Department should have considered antidumping duty respondent Antique Marbonite's untimely filed extension request, which led to the rejection of its second supplemental questionnaire, since extraordinary circumstances warranted a retroactive extension of the deadline, three importers argued in a Feb. 10 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Commerce also erred by failing to afford the plaintiff its "second chance" opportunity, given that Antique intended to meet the deadline and "promptly" told the agency it needed an extension "when it realized that it [had] not done so," plaintiffs Arizona Tile, M S International and PNS Clearance claimed (Arizona Tile v. United States, CIT # 23-00019).

The Court of International Trade in a Feb. 13 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's finding that exporter Cheng Shin Rubber Industry's tires do not qualify for an exclusion to the antidumping duty order on light truck spare tires, despite the petitioner originally agreeing to include specific exclusion language for Cheng Shin's tires. Judge Stephen Vaden said it is not his job "to save Cheng Shin from itself," given the negotiated exclusion required the tires must be "designed and marketed exclusively" as temporary-use light truck tires, and Cheng Shin submitted evidence showing its tires were not exclusively designed and marketed as such.

The Court of International Trade in a text-only order on Feb. 10 denied plaintiff a motion by Archroma U.S. for leave to file a supplemental complaint since it failed to tell the court whether defendant-intervenor Teh Fong Min (TFM) International Co. consented to the move. The case concerns the International Trade Commission's and Commerce Department's decision to revoke the antidumping duty order on stilbenic optical brightening agents from China and Tawain. Archroma moved for leave to file a supplemental complaint to add two additional allegations over the ITC's move terminating the second sunset review of the AD order. While the plaintiff said it had the support of the U.S., it didn't indicate whether the defendant-intervenor consented, leading the trade court to deny the motion (Archroma v. U.S. Department of Commerce, CIT # 22-00354).

The Commerce Department uses "made-up 'exclusions'" from the scope of certain antidumping and countervailing duty orders that, even if they were "otherwise permitted, which they are not," fail to find support in the authorities the agency relies on, AD petitioner Magnum Magnetics argued in a Feb. 6 motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade. The petitioner railed against Commerce's refusal to perform a (k)(3) analysis of the scope even though it relied on a single evidential element from a (k)(3) analysis in its (k)(1) analysis (Magnum Magnetics Corp. v. United States, CIT # 22-00254).

A proposed remand order that would force the International Trade Commission to reconsider a 2021 final injury determination in an antidumping duty case on methionine from Spain and Japan is merely an attempt to have the Commission "reweigh the facts ... to reach a negative determination," the ITC said in a Feb. 9 response to a draft remand order (Adisseo Espana and Adisseo USA v. United States, CIT # 21-00562).