The Commerce Department continued to give Indian exporter Bharat Forge Limited a 0% dumping rate after conducting on-site verification for the first time on remand. Submitting its remand results to the Court of International Trade on Feb. 7, Commerce said the on-site verification led to a host of revisions to the agency's margin calculations, though the end result was ultimately the same for the company (Ellwood City Forge Co. v. United States, CIT # 21-00007).
The Commerce Department’s verification proceedings aren't “extensive” or “onerous,” and the department “has wide latitude” in conducting them even when investigating companies not party to a CVD investigation, the U.S. and a petitioner said Feb. 5 after another remand redetermination in a Chinese EBCP case challenging several cabinet exporters’ rates rooted in adverse facts available (Dalian Meisen Woodworking Co. v. U.S., CIT # 20-00110).
Importers seeking reclassification of their 3D-printing pens as toys rather than machinery consolidated their cases Feb. 5 at the Court of International Trade (Quantified Operations Limited v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 22-00178).
British financial giant Standard Chartered Bank waived its right to respond to a petition for writ of certiorari at the U.S. Supreme Court in a False Claims Act case brought by whistleblower Brutus Trading. Standard Chartered said it doesn't intend to file a response unless prompted by the court (Brutus Trading v. Standard Chartered, Sup. Ct. # 23-813).
The Commerce Department still hasn't proven that Hyundai received a subsidy in the form of a “direct transfer of funds” from the South Korean government due to the country’s cap and trade program, the exporter said Feb. 5 in comments on the department’s remand results (Hyundai Steel Co. v. U.S. , CIT # 22-00170).
An importer said Feb. 7 that CBP wrongfully prevented a weight loss dietary supplement from entering the U.S. (Unichem Enterprises v. U.S., CIT # 24-00033).
The U.S. District Court for the District of Washington on Jan. 30 granted in part and denied in part importer Yakima Products' bid to seal parts of the complaint in a False Claims Act whistleblower suit against the company's alleged failure to pay import duties and false identification of the country of origin (United States v. Yakima Products Inc., D. Wash. # 21-0524).