The Commerce Department has failed to address the flaws found in the use of the Cohen's d test when using its differential pricing analysis (DPA) to detect "masked" dumping, exporter SeAH Steel Corp. argued in a reply brief at the Court of International Trade. Responding to the U.S.'s argument that SeAH has failed to point to any statistical texts that explicitly address Commerce's claim that it can properly use the test, the exporter said that the burden is on the agency to find supportive texts and not merely rely on the silence of statistical authorities (Stupp Corp. v. United States, CIT #15-00334).

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The Court of International Trade in a June 17 opinion denied exporter Shanghai Tainai Bearing's and importer C&U Americas' bid for an injunction against cash deposits at the antidumping duty rate decided in the 2019-20 review of the AD order on tapered roller bearings from China. Judge Stephen Vaden said that the plaintiffs failed to establish a likelihood to succeed on the merits or suffer irreparable harm and that the balance of equities and public interest favored the U.S. government.

CBP reasonably denied customs broker test taker Shuzhen Zhong credit for two questions on the customs broker license exam, the U.S. argued in a June 17 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. In the brief, DOJ discussed the two questions at issue, defending CBP's rulings on the classification of glazed ceramic mosaic cubes and how to obtain relief from CBP's detention of a shipment of 1,000 handbags bearing a mark that copies but is not identical to a registered and recorded mark (Shuzhen Zhong v. United States, CIT #22-00041).

The Commerce Department properly used the expected method to determine the non-selected respondent's rate in an antidumping duty review of steel nails from Taiwan, the Court of International Trade said in a June 16 opinion. Judge Mark Barnett ruled that the burden was on the plaintiffs, led by PrimeSource Building Products, to establish that the expected method -- the practice of averaging adverse facts available rates in the absence of non-AFA, zero or de minimis margins -- should not be used. The judge ruled that the plaintiffs gave no evidence to back their claim that the expected method was not reasonably reflective of their actual margins.

The Court of International Trade in a June 17 opinion denied plaintiffs Shanghai Tainai Bearing Co. and C&U Americas injunctive relief from paying cash deposits stemming from the 2019-2020 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on tapered roller bearings from China. Judge Stephen Vaden said that the plaintiffs failed to establish that they were likely to suffer irreparable harm from paying the 538.79% cash deposit rate or that they were likely to succeed on the merits. Vaden further held that the balance of equities and public interest favor the U.S. when considering an injunction on the cash deposits.

The Commerce Department properly dropped its particular market situation adjustment to the sales-below-cost test, the Court of International Trade held in a June 16 opinion. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said that since the question of whether Commerce can make such an adjustment was settled in the key Hyundai Steel v. U.S. case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, "the court need not waste its or the Parties' resources any further."

The Court of International Trade in a June 15 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's final determination in the 2019 antidumping duty investigation on wood mouldings and millwork products from Brazil. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves ruled that Commerce properly combined the three mandatory respondents -- Araupel, Braslumber Industria de Molduras and BrasPine Madeiras -- into a single entity and correctly didn't apply the major input rule to certain log purchases. Commerce was also right to revise Araupel's general and administrative expenses to account for fair value adjustments associated with the annual revaluation of standing trees in the company's unharvested forests, the court said. The result is a zero percent dumping margin for the collapsed entity.

CBP properly denied payouts of interest assessed after liquidation, known as delinquency interest, on collected antidumping and countervailing duties under the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000, the Court of International Trade said in a series of five nearly identical opinions. Judge Timothy Stanceu ruled that it must rely on CBP's interpretation of how to administer the CDSOA and define how interest is earned on AD/CV duties given ambiguities in the statute pertaining to delinquency interest. The court also held that given that the interest is put into a single sum after liquidation, it loses its "individual character" and is no longer interest earned on the duties.

The Court of International Trade in a June 16 opinion found that the Commerce Department was right to use the expected method when determining the non-selected respondent's rate in the antidumping review of steel nails from Taiwan. Judge Mark Barnett ruled that the burden was on the plaintiffs, led by PrimeSource Building Products, to establish that the expected method -- the practice of averaging adverse facts available rates in the absence of non-AFA, zero or de minimis margins -- should not be used. The judge ruled that the plaintiffs gave no evidence to back their claim that the expected method was not reasonably reflective of their actual margins.