An importer is asking the Court of International Trade to direct CBP to reliquidate entries of Chinese citric acid anhydrous that Thatcher says CBP improperly liquidated as subject to antidumping and countervailing duties. In its March 31 complaint, Thatcher said that CBP extended liquidation of the entries with neither a "statutory basis" nor the "legal authority" to do so and without instruction from the Commerce Department (Thatcher Company, Inc. v. United States, CIT #20-00067).

The Commerce Department opened the record on remand to accept Turkish exporter Celik Halat ve Tel Sanayi's sections B and C questionnaire responses after the Court of International Trade ruled it was an abuse of discretion to reject the minutes-late submissions. In remand results filed April 1, Commerce dropped the dumping rate for Celik from 53.65% to 17.88%, centering the case on other issues in the antidumping duty investigation (Celik Halat ve Tel Sanayi A.S. v. U.S., CIT #21-00045).

The Court of International Trade should reject the U.S.'s motion to dismiss a case challenging the Commerce Department's denial of a request to issue a scope ruling since the motion is "factually and legally inaccurate," plaintiffs led by Zhejiang Yuhua Timber Co. said in an April 1 brief. The plaintiffs said that the U.S.'s position that jurisdiction would be established at the end of a changed circumstances review requested by the plaintiffs is "plainly without any factual basis and purely speculative" (Zhejiang Yuhua Timber Co. v. United States, CIT #21-00502).

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative “properly exercised its authority” under the Section 307 modification provisions of the 1974 Trade Act when it ordered the imposition of the lists 3 and 4A Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports, the Court of International Trade ruled in an April 1 opinion. Test-case plaintiffs HMTX Industries and Jasco Products, plus the more than 3,600 complaints that followed, sought to vacate the tariffs on grounds that lists 3 and 4A were unlawful without USTR launching a new Section 301 investigation.

There is no error in the Commerce Department's liquidation instructions, so importer MS Solar's lawsuit under Section 1581(i), the Court of International Trade's "residual" jurisdiction, should be dismissed, the U.S. said in a March 30 reply brief backing its motion to dismiss. Instead, the case should have been filed under Section 1581(c) to contest the antidumping duty review itself, the brief said (MS Solar Investments v. United States, CIT #21-00303).

The Commerce Department erred when it switched its zero percent dumping margin for Greek exporter Corinth Pipeworks Pipe Industry (CPW) to a 41.04% dumping rate despite the fact that the data was "entirely unchanged," the exporter told the Court of International Trade in a March 31 complaint. CPW also contested Commerce's use of adverse facts available despite the fact that it fully cooperated in the antidumping duty review and the agency's failure to conduct a verification, virtual or otherwise (Corinth Pipeworks Pipe Industry v. United States, CIT #22-00063).

Decisions by a single port of entry cannot act as the basis for claims of an established treatment nationally by CBP for customs purposes, DOJ told the Court of International Trade in a brief filed March 29. In a tariff classification challenge brought by Kent International related to bicycle seats, DOJ said CBP New York/Newark's granting of protests doesn't establish a treatment that required notice and comment before CBP Long Beach classified the bicycle seats in a different subheading (Kent International Inc. v. United States, CIT #15-00135).

The Court of International Trade dealt a blow to the over 3,600 lawsuits challenging Lists 3 and 4A Section 301 China tariffs covering over $200 billion in goods, finding that the U.S. Trade Representative had the authority to impose the tariffs. In the highly-anticipated opinion, the court ruled against the plaintiffs' argument that the USTR could not impose Section 301 tariffs because the government was responding to retaliatory tariffs from China.

The Court of International Trade remanded several elements of a case brought by Mexican exporter Building Systems de Mexico, in a March 21 opinion made public March 30 concerning the antidumping investigation into fabricated structural steel from Mexico covering entries in 2018. Judge Claire Kelly sent back elements of the Commerce Department's decision to use mandatory respondent Corey S.A.'s home market sales to explain why the agency rejected BSM's data for insufficient volume but relied on Corey's when it had less data, and to explain whether a particular sale was contracted for during the investigation period.

Taiwanese corrosion-resistant steel products exporters Yieh Phui Enterprise Co. and Prospeity Tieh signed off on the Commerce Department's remand results in an antidumping duty matter at the Court of International Trade. On remand, Commerce reversed its decision to collapse mandatory respondents Yieh Phui and Synn Industrial Co. with one of their affiliates, Propserity Tieh Enterprise Co., in a bid to bring its stance in line with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. "It is our position that the Department’s decision on the collapsing issue made in the Remand Results is in line with the [Federal Circuit's] decision," Yieh Phui's comments said (Prosperity Tieh Enterprise Co., Ltd. v. United States, CIT Consol. #16-00138).