The Court of International Trade in a Sept. 22 opinion denied plaintiff Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret's motion to stay its countervailing duty review challenge pending resolution of a case over the previous review of the same CVD order. Kaptan's case concerns the 2019 administrative review of the CVD order on steel concrete reinforcing bar from Turkey. Judge Gary Katzmann said the stay would not promote judicial economy because the pending cases are before CIT and not the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Additionally, he said Kaptan has not put forth any "pressing need" for a stay.
The Court of International Trade ruled Sept. 21 that importer Eteros Technologies USA is legally allowed to import goods federally deemed "drug paraphernalia" because Washington state legalized the delivery, possession and manufacture of marijuana-related drug paraphernalia. Judge Gary Katzmann found Eteros is authorized to import motor frame assemblies used to create marijuana harvesting units under the federal exemption section of the Controlled Substances Act. As such, the U.S. cannot legally seize or forfeit Eteros' imports, Katzmann said.
The U.S. Court of International Trade in a Sept. 20 order denied a motion from John Liu and GL Paper Distribution, defendants in a Section 592 penalty case, to strike a portion of the complaint. Liu had moved to strike elements of the complaint he deemed to not be relevant to the imports at issue. Judge Jane Restani ruled that striking these parts of the complaint would be "premature," since the matter of relevancy is a "question of evidence" and not meant to be subject to a motion to strike. Liu also said that because the contested elements of the complaint are "irrelevant," they are prejudicial and could mislead. However, Restani ruled that if Liu is not involved with the companies he says are irrelevant to the case, then this should be proven through evidence and not excluded through a motion to strike.
The Court of International Trade in a Sept. 19 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's final results in the 2017 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on hot-rolled steel flat products from South Korea. On remand, Commerce dropped its use of facts otherwise available for a South Korean port usage rights program, resulting in a de minimis rate for respondent Hyundai Steel. Though Hyundai continued to argue against Commerce's decision to countervail the program, Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves ruled that consideration of the benefit finding "would have no practical significance and is mooted."
The Commerce Department is finalizing a two-year reprieve for imports of solar cells from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam but is adding an important caveat – that exempt solar cells be used or installed in the U.S. within 180 days of the end of the grace period. Commerce’s final rule waives suspension of liquidation and collection of AD/CV duties on the Southeast Asian solar cells until June 6, 2024, in the event Commerce issues affirmative determinations in its ongoing anti-circumvention inquiries prior to that date. Commerce may end the grace period earlier if the national emergency the reprieve is based upon is terminated.
The Court of International Trade in a Sept. 13 opinion found the Commerce Department reasonably used adverse facts available in a countervailing duty case related to the Chinese government's failure to submit certain information about the Export Buyer's Credit Program. Marking a clear departure from the trade court's numerous past rulings on the subject, Judge M. Miller Baker said Commerce reasonably explained why it needed the information from the Chinese government to verify that the respondents and their U.S. customers did not use the EBCP. The judge further sided with the U.S. over its positions that acrylic polymer can be used as a stand-alone primer and that the agency can average all freight routes to establish a world market benchmark for ocean freight.
The Court of International Trade upheld the Commerce Department's second remand results in the countervailing duty investigation into ripe olives from Spain. Judge Gary Katzmann in a Sept. 14 opinion ruled Commerce properly found that certain subsidy programs were de facto specific to Spanish olive growers. He also said Commerce reasonably found from consumption data that the demand for certain varietals of raw olives is "substantially dependent on the demand for table olives."
The Court of International Trade in a Sept. 13 order upheld the Commerce Department's remand results in a case brought by respondent Both-Well (Taizhou) Steel Fittings Co. over a countervailing duty review of forged steel fittings from China. Judge Claire Kelly previously sent back Commerce's use of adverse facts available based on the Chinese government's unwillingness to submit certain information related to China's Export Buyer's Credit Program. The judge said that if the agency wanted to keep using AFA it had to attempt to verify the non-use of the program by looking at evidence from Both-Well and its U.S. customers. Commerce did so on remand, finding that the respondent didn't benefit from the EBCP, dropping the company's CVD rate from 25.90% to 15.36%.
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a Sept. 8 opinion denied a group of domestic steel manufacturers the right to intervene in six cases challenging denied exclusions to Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs. Judges Kimberly Moore and Todd Hughes affirmed the Court of International Trade's ruling that the domestic producers did not have a legally protectable interest in the case, though they parted from the trade court's position in ruling that the manufacturers established standing to intervene. While they had standing, the lack of a legally protectable interest stunted their bid to join the litigation. Judge Pauline Newman dissented from the majority opinion, ruling the manufacturers have clear economic interests in the tariff exclusion requests, establishing their right to intervene.
The Court of International Trade in a Sept. 8 order upheld the Commerce Department's remand results in a scope case on the antidumping duty order on carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings from China originally brought by Vandewater International. Following an initial decision from Judge Leo Gordon, Commerce continued to find that Vandewater's steel branch outlets used in fire protection systems fall under the scope of the AD order using an analysis of the (k)(2) criteria. In the newest opinion, Gordon said despite the plaintiffs' arguments that show the record could back a finding that the outlets are excluded from the order, the court cannot find that Commerce acted unreasonably in its conclusion using the (k)(2) factors.