The Commerce Department properly excluded dual-stenciled pipe from the antidumping duty order on circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Thailand, the Court of International Trade ruled in an Aug. 25 opinion. Judge Stephen Vaden ruled that no line pipe was made in Thailand when the original AD investigation was conducted almost 40 years ago and that the International Trade Commission made no harm finding for line or dual-stenciled pipe from Thailand.

The Court of International Trade failed to recognize that key facts in a customs fraud case are not in dispute, but if it had, the court "would likely have" come to a different conclusion over when the statute of limitations had run out for the U.S. to bring its case, defendants Greenlight Organic and Parambir Singh Aulakh argued. Filing a motion for rehearing Aug. 25, the defendants said the trade court committed an error when finding that a piece of evidence has to establish fraud for the statute of limitations to begin to run and not merely give allegations of misconduct to the government (United States v. Greenlight Organic, CIT #17-00031).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a recent and highly anticipated opinion ruled that CBP cannot consider a country's non-market economy status when deciding whether to grant first sale treatment to a transaction (see 2208110060). The case, brought by importer Meyer Corp., now heads back to the Court of International Trade, which will hear arguments over how to appraise cookware imported by Meyer. John Peterson, counsel for Meyer, told Trade Law Daily that he is considering two options when the case gets back to the trade court: seek a retrial or mediation.

The Commerce Department was right to exclude dual-stenciled standard pipe and line pipe from the antidumping duty order on circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Thailand, the Court of International Trade said in an Aug. 25 opinion. Upholding Commerce's remand results in a scope challenge, Judge Stephen Vaden ruled that no line pipe was made in Thailand when the initial AD investigation was commenced over 40 years ago and no injury finding was made for line or dual-stenciled pipe from Thailand.

The Court of International Trade in an Aug. 26 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's remand results in the 2016-17 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on oil country tubular goods from South Korea. Previously, Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves remanded Commerce's particular market situation finding, reallocation of respondent NEXTEEL's reported costs for non-prime products for an allocation based on actual costs, adjustment to NEXTEEL' production line suspension costs, calculation of respondent SeAH Steel Co.'s affiliated seller's further manufacturing cost and inclusion of SeAH's inventory valuation losses in its general and administrative expense ratio.

The Court of International Trade in an Aug. 24 text-only order granted a partial consent motion to consolidate two cases, one of which is a consolidated action brought by two importers, challenging a CBP Enforce and Protect Act investigation. The cases concern CBP's finding that American Pacific Plywood, Far East American, Liberty Woods International and InterGlobal Forest evaded the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on hardwood plywood from China by transshipping the goods through Vietnam. The complaints include counts against CBP's alleged due process violations and determination that all the imports were covered merchandise (see 2207200031). Earlier in August, the court consolidated the Far East and American Pacific Plywood cases. The U.S. then moved to consolidate the Far East and InterGlobal cases, arguing that it would promote judicial efficiency (see 2208230026). The cases were assigned to Judge Mark Barnett (Far East American v. U.S., CIT #22-00213).

The Court of International Trade denied plaintiff Nucor's motion for a stay in a countervailing duty case, finding that the steel producer's arguments were "not persuasive." Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves denied the stay in an Aug. 23 order, declaring a stay pending resolution of another action over the same countervailing duty review "would delay the just and speedy resolution of this litigation" (Nucor Corporation v. United States, CIT #22-00137).

Protests are not a prerequisite for Section 301 refunds on goods retroactively excluded from the duties on them and the government overstepped its authority in imposing such a requirement, Environment One argued in an Aug. 18 brief at the Court of International Trade (Environment One Corporation v. U.S., CIT # 22-00124).

The Court of International Trade in an Aug. 24 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's move to drop its particular market situation adjustment for a key input of circular welded non-alloy steel pipe from South Korea in an antidumping duty review. Commerce had previously dropped the PMS adjustment for one of review's mandatory respondents but not the other. In the case's fourth remand results, the agency dropped the adjustment for the other, lowering non-selected respondent SeAH Steel Corp.'s dumping rate from 19.28% to 9.77%. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves sustained the move to drop the adjustment for the other respondent.

The Commerce Department stuck by its positions in an antidumping duty review, in Aug. 23 remand results. The agency further explained its selection of India as the primary surrogate country and its analysis of respondent NTSF Seafoods' reporting of the company's ratio of whole live fish to fillets and the moisture content of the fillets (Catfish Farmers of America v. U.S., CIT #20-00105).