A Commerce Department regulation establishing expedited reviews for countervailing duty investigations was vacated in an Aug. 18 opinion from the Court of International Trade. Chief Judge Mark Barnett penned his fourth opinion in the case, upholding Commerce's finding that it couldn't find any alternative statutory basis on which to find that the regulation can exist.

The Court of International Trade consolidated six challenges to the Commerce Department's denials of Section 232 steel and aluminum exclusion requests in an Aug. 17 order. Judge M. Miller Baker said the cases brought by North American Interpipe, Evraz Inc., Allegheny Technologies Incorporated, AM/NS Calvert, California Steel Industries and Valbruna Slater Stainless will be jointly considered for the "limited purpose of resolving the motions to remand."

The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's remand results in an antidumping duty case over the question of whether to "collapse" affiliate entities since they were owned by members of the "same, albeit estranged, family." In an Aug. 20 opinion, Judge Gary Katzmann held that Commerce properly reversed its original determination that the three companies were affiliated, since they did not clear the three requirements for collapsing given entities. In doing so, Commerce dropped its application of adverse facts available and gave Echjay Forgings Private Limited a 4.58% dumping margin.

A motion for judgment submitted by plaintiff Fujian Yinfeng Imp & Exp Trading Co. was rejected by the Court of International Trade's Judge M. Miller Baker on Aug. 17 due to a failure to comply with formatting requirements. In a notice from the court, Baker said that the motion was rejected since it failed to include a glossary of case-specific acronyms and abbreviations. The corrected document was instructed to be refiled by Aug. 25 (Fujian Yinfeng Imp & Exp Trading Co., Ltd. v. U.S., CIT #21-00088).

The Commerce Department will reconsider its application of the major input rule, treatment of certain general and administrative expenses and its use of adverse facts available in an antidumping duty case, according to two Aug. 18 Court of International Trade opinions. After remanding the case once before, Judge Leo Gordon remanded certain elements of the results yet again, but did sustain certain parts of Commerce's reconsideration, including its differential pricing analysis and adjustment of interest expenses to include a portion of the respondent's parent holding company's interest expense.

The Commerce Department reasonably rejected United Nations Comtrade and Eurostat data on natural gas imports from Russia when spurning the use of a tier-two benchmark for its less than adequate remuneration of a countervailing duty respondent's natural gas purchase prices, the Court of International Trade said. Further, Judge Gary Katzmann ruled that the agency properly denied the use of Eurostat natural gas import data from Norway, Algeria, Libya and Ukraine in a tier-three benchmark calculation, while reasonably selecting International Energy Agency (IEA) data for the benchmark.

The Court of International Trade created an “impermissible distinction” under customs valuation law between goods from non-market and market economies when it denied importer Meyer Corp. first sale valuation, the importer argued in an Aug. 9 opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Kicking off litigation in the much-anticipated appeal proceedings, Meyer argued against the alleged impermissibility of CIT's first sale rejection and for its qualifications for the special valuation status (Meyer Corporation, U.S. v. United States, Fed. Cir. #21-1932).

The Commerce Department's remand results following an opinion from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit over an antidumping duty administrative review should be remanded yet again, mandatory respondent Bosun Tools Co. said in comments at the Court of International Trade. Commerce should have applied neutral facts available instead of adverse facts available when weighing Bosun's country of origin information using a first-in-first-out (FIFO) methodology, Bosun said. Even if this use of AFA is sustained, it should be limited to missing information and not applied to the U.S. sales prices for reported-FIFO sales, as Commerce did, Bosun suggested (Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. United States, CIT #17-00167).

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with some recent top stories. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's final results in a countervailing duty administrative review on steel concrete reinforcing bar from Turkey in an Aug. 18 opinion. Judge Gary Katzmann ruled against plaintiff Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi's motion for judgment, holding that Commerce permissibly rejected United Nations Comtrade and Eurostat data on natural gas imports from Russia in calculating a "tier-two benchmark" in its sales-below-cost analysis of Habas' natural gas prices. Katzmann also held that Commerce reasonably refused to use the Eurostat natural gas import data from Norway, Alberia, Libya and Ukraine in its "tier-three benchmark" calculations, while properly relying on IEA data for the tier-three calculations.