The Commerce Department properly used the expected method to set the non-selected respondents rate in an antidumping duty case by weight-averaging two adverse facts available rates and a zero percent margin, the Court of International Trade ruled in a July 15 opinion. Issuing the ruling following three remands, Judge Mark Barnett said that the plaintiffs, led by Pro-Team Coil Nail Enterprise, did not present enough evidence to show that the mandatory respondents rates were not representative of the non-selected respondents' dumping margins.

The Commerce Department failed to show that it held a fair comparison between the constructed export price for three affiliated steel pipe producers and their home market price, the Court of International Trade ruled in a July 15 opinion. Judge Timothy Stanceu ruled that Commerce did not discuss how a fair comparison was reached in light of evidence showing two levels of trade in the home market, nor did the agency analyze detracting evidence placed on the record by the plaintiffs, led by Universal Tube and Plastic Industries.

The Aluminum Extrusion Fair Trade Committee (AEFTC) should not be allowed to intervene in a case contesting CBP's finding that Global Aluminum Distributor and Hialeah Aluminum Supply evaded the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China, Dominican exporter Kingtom Aluminio argued. Filing an opposition brief at the Court of International Trade on July 13, with the support of Global Aluminum, Kingtom argued that AEFTC's motion is untimely, it failed to show a conditional right to intervene and the committee cannot intervene based on a shared claim or defense (Global Aluminum Distributor v. United States, CIT Consol. #21-00198).

Adverse price affects from imports do not have to be the main driver of injury for the International Trade Commission to reach an affirmative injury finding in an antidumping duty investigation, said Novus International, an intervenor supporting the ITC's challenged affirmative injury determination in the AD duty investigations on methionine from Spain and Japan, in a brief filed July 14 (Adisseo Espana and Adisseo USA v. U.S., CIT #21-00562).

Plaintiffs in an antidumping duty case, led by Ellwood Cit y Forge Company, filed for a reconsideration of a Court of International Trade opinion that found that they failed to exhaust their administrative remedies when challenging the Commerce Department's decision to issue a questionnaire in lieu of on-site verification due to COVID-19 travel restrictions. The reconsideration bid argued that Commerce's remand results in a separate antidumping case revealed how futile raising the point administratively would have been, and that in light of these new facts, the court should reconsider its ruling (Ellwood City Forge Company v. United States, CIT #21-00073).

The Commerce Department properly rejected countervailing duty respondent Tau-Ken Temir's questionnaire responses for being untimely, as they were filed an hour and 41 minutes beyond the deadline, the Court of International Trade ruled in a July 14 opinion. Judge Leo Gordon said it's "unclear" why the plaintiffs. led by TKT, failed to file an extension request earlier in the process -- the request was filed an hour and 10 minutes before the deadline -- and the record shows the respondent didn't put forth a maximum effort to give Commerce the requested information by the deadline. Gordon also held that TKT put no information on the record to back its claim the petitioners' conflict-of-interest claim interfered with its ability to respond to the investigation's questionnaire.

CBP’s reversal in an antidumping and countervailing duty evasion case at the Court of International Trade case puts the agency’s entire Enforce and Protect Act program “in jeopardy,” the domestic industry group Aluminum Extruders Council said in a blog post July 13.

Importer and U.S. subsidiary of a Chinese manufacturing company, Wanxiang America Corp. is guilty of negligence by making false statements and omissions over its entries of wheel hub assemblies, radial ball and tapered roller bearings, and universal joints and their parts, the U.S. argued in a July 13 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Through its negligence, Wanxiang America avoided antidumping duties and customs duties on its entries, cheating the U.S. out of over $31 million in lost revenue, the U.S. said. DOJ filed its case to seek the lost duty payments along with a penalty (United States v. Wanxiang America Corporation, CIT #22-00205).

The Court of International Trade issued a pair of opinions on July 15. In one, Judge Timothy Stanceu sent back the Commerce Department's final results in the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on welded steel pipe products from the United Arab Emirates. Stanceu ruled that Commerce's decision to deny plaintiffs, led by Universal Tube and Plastic Industries, a level-of-trade adjustment was based on unsatisfactory analysis "when viewed according to the statutory criteria and the record evidence on the whole."

The Court of International Trade in a July 14 opinion said that the Commerce Department properly rejected countervailing duty respondent Tau-Ken Temir's questionnaire response as being untimely because it was filed an hour and 41 minutes late. In the CVD investigation on silicon metal from Kazakhstan, counsel for TKT was experiencing computer problems and submitted an extension request an hour and 10 minutes before the filing deadline. Gordon upheld Commerce's rejection of this request, holding that it is not clear why the plaintiffs didn't file an extension earlier and that the respondent didn't put forth a maximum effort to give Commerce the requested information by the deadline.