German exporter AG der Dillinger Huttenwerke will appeal a December Court of International Trade decision sustaining the Commerce Department's antidumping duty investigation on carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from Germany. The company will take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, where it will contest the decision to uphold Commerce's proposed quality code for sour service pressure vessel plate (see 2312210054). The court said Dillinger didn't make the "requisite showing to demonstrate that reconsideration is appropriate" after the court already rejected the claim (AG der Dillinger Huttenwerke v. United States, CIT # 17-00158).
A citric acid exporter said Feb. 9 that the Commerce Department had been wrong to refuse to do a quarterly analysis of the exporter’s costs, even though it had faced large cost fluctuations due to the COVID-19 pandemic (Citribel N.V. v. U.S., CIT # 24-00010).
Court of International Trade Judge Stephen Vaden on Feb. 12 recused himself from a pair of cases in which Nicholas Phillips, associate at Schagrin Associates, appeared for one of the parties after he was working as a law clerk for Vaden while the case was pending (Asia Wheel Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. # 23-00096) (American Kitchen Cabinet Alliance v. United States, CIT # 23-00140).
While the U.S. remained neutral, a steel nail exporter on Feb. 8 called “moot” a petitioner’s motion to stay one antidumping duty appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit until the petitioner’s other interlocutory appeal had been heard (Oman Fasteners v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1350).
The U.S. Judicial Council's Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability's recent report sustaining the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's one-year suspension of Judge Pauline Newman didn't evaluate her constitutional claims, leaving that to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Newman told the district court (Pauline Newman v. Kimberly Moore, D.D.C. # 23-01334).
Two Feb. 6 motions for judgment from domestic petitioners and a foreign exporter both sought, for different reasons, to remand the Commerce Department’s final results in a 2021-2022 review of the antidumping duties on certain frozen warmwater shrimp from India (Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee v U.S., CIT # 23-00202).
After oral arguments regarding a Cambodian mattress exporter’s antidumping duty rate, the exporter, the U.S. and petitioners filedpost-argumentsubmissions Feb. 7 that focused on the Commerce Department's use of nonmarket economy data in a market economy case (Best Mattresses International v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 21-00281).
DOJ attorney Robert Kiepura replaced Joshua Kurland as principal counsel in a case on the Commerce Department's countervailing duty investigation on wind towers from Canada. The court approved the change in a Feb. 8 order (Quebec v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-1807).
The Court of International Trade in a Feb. 8 order vacated the dismissals of seven cases brought by Canadian exporter ArcelorMittal Long Products Canada G.P. Judge Timothy Stanceu reinstated the cases on the Customs Case Management Calendar and said they can remain there until Jan. 31, 2025 (ArcelorMittal Long Products Canada G.P. v. United States, CIT # 21-00037, -00038, -00039, -00040, -00041, -00042, -00043).