Italian pasta exporters La Molisana and Valdigrano di Flavio Pagani have not provided "compelling reasons" for the Commerce Department to part with its "longstanding" and "reasonable" practice for reporting the protein content of pasta in an antidumping case, the U.S. told the Court of International Trade in a March 28 brief. Rather, the relevant statute, past agency practice and case law all show that Commerce properly based its product-matching criteria on physical characteristics. In doing so, the agency said it legally derived the pasta's protein content -- a physical characteristic -- from the nutrition information on the packaging label (La Molisana v. United States, CIT Consol. #21-00291).

The Commerce Department improperly found that Krakatau POSCO -- a joint venture between a private South Korean steel company and an Indonesian government-owned firm -- was not a government authority, leading Commerce to find its provision of cut-to-length steel plate below cost was not countervailable, the Wind Tower Trade Coalition said. Making its case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a March 28 opening brief, the coalition said that Commerce "effectively elevated form over substance, frustrated the intent of the CVD law" and allowed Indonesia's wind tower exporter to "escape duties" (PT. Kenertec Power System v. U.S., CIT Consol. #20-03687).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a 35% duty rate for StarKist's tuna salad pouches, agreeing with CBP's preferred Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading, in a March 30 opinion. Upholding the Court of International Trade's opinion, Judges Kimberly Moore, Timothy Dyk and Jimmie Reyna said that the tuna pouches were "not minced" and "in oil," prompting their placement under subheading 1604.14.10.

Washington-based importer Keirton USA isn't permitted to import drug paraphernalia since Washington state law doesn't expressly authorize the possession of such items, the U.S. told the Court of International Trade in a March 28 cross-motion for judgment. If the state's current laws did authorize possession of drug paraphernalia, then the mere absence of criminal liability -- the situation in Washington -- would consume the whole statute federally outlawing possession of drug paraphernalia, DOJ said (Keirton USA, Inc. v. United States, CIT #21-00452).

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 on March 28 upheld the International Trade Commission's affirmative injury determination in the antidumping duty and countervailing duty investigations on wood mouldings and millwork from China. Judge Leo Gordon said that Chinese exporter Jeld-Wen failed to successfully argue that laminated veneer lumber (LVL) is not included in the domestic like product for wood mouldings and millwork and that other economic factors, and not imports, caused the domestic injury. On the latter point, Gordon said that Jeld-Wen needed to show that its conclusion is the only one to be drawn from the record and not the preferred one -- something the plaintiff failed to do.

The Court of International Trade remanded a case brought by Mexican exporter Building Systems de Mexico in a March 21 opinion made public March 30 concerning the AD investigation into fabricated structural steel from Mexico. 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.

The Commerce Department unlawfully decided not to initiate a changed circumstances review following GreenFirst Forest Productions' acquisition of Rayonier A.M. Canada's lumber mills, GreenFirst said in a March 25 complaint at the Court of International Trade. GreenFirst said that Commerce misapplied agency practice in denying the CCR since RYAM's rate was not based on any subsidies it received. The agency also violated Congress' directive to investigate changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a review when it declined to embark on the CCR (GreenFirst Forest Products Inc. v. United States, CIT #22-00097).

The Commerce Department requested a voluntary remand in a March 28 filing at the Court of International Trade so it can reconsider its use of adverse facts available relating to China's Export Buyer's Credit Program. The remand is appropriate given Commerce's "evolving practice" on the topic, the brief said. In a separate countervailing duty investigation, Commerce found that it was able to verify that a respondent's U.S. customers did not use the program without certain information requested from the Chinese government (Risen Energy Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. #20-03912).

The Court of International Trade in a March 28 decision denied mattress importer Ashley Furniture Industries and its foreign manufacturers a request for an open-ended injunction in an antidumping duty case. Judge Timothy Reif said that the plaintiffs failed to show that the threat of liquidation posed immediate irreparable harm and that they clearly had a likelihood to succeed on the merits of the case. The decision cuts against two other CIT decisions granting an open-ended injunction.