The government's claim that a group of Canadian softwood lumber exporters shouldn't be able to intervene in an antidumping duty case is based on "an unreasonably narrow, absurd, and constitutionally problematic reading of" the statute on parties entitled to participate in civil actions, the exporters argued (Government of Canada v. United States, CIT Consol. # 23-00187).
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 21 sustained the Commerce Department's fourth remand results in a case on an antidumping investigation into carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from Germany. Judge Leo Gordon noted that the court already rejected exporter AG der Dillinger Huttenwerke's argument that Commerce improperly rejected the company's proposed quality code for sour service pressure vessel plate, adding that Dillinger didn't properly show reconsideration of the issue is "appropriate." The judge also rejected petitioner Nucor's challenge to the adjustment to the model match methodology to include a separate quality code for sour transport plate in calculating Dillinger's margin.
The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's use of total adverse facts available against antidumping respondent Saffron Living Co. after the company withdrew from the case on remand. Sustaining the 760% AD rate against the company in the investigation on mattresses from Thailand, Judge M. Miller Baker said the remand results are upheld since no remaining party contests the mark. The case was on remand so Commerce could attempt to verify data from Saffron, though this became impossible after Saffron withdrew from the proceeding.
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 21 sustained the Commerce Department's continued rejection of exporter AG der Dillinger Huttenwerke's proposed quality code for sour service pressure vessel plate. Upholding Commerce's fourth remand results in the antidumping duty investigation on carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from Germany, Judge Leo Gordon said Dillinger didn't make the "requisite showing to demonstrate that reconsideration is appropriate here" after the court already rejected the claim.
Exporter Kumar Industries will appeal a November Court of International Trade decision sustaining the Commerce Department's assignment of a 13.61% adverse facts available dumping rate to the exporter based on its "inadequate explanations" regarding one of its partners ownership interests in two unnamed companies (see 2311270005). In the decision, the court sustained the rate, issued as part of the first antidumping duty review on glycine from India, finding that Kumar prevented Commerce from conducting a proper affiliate analysis (Kumar Industries v. United States, CIT # 21-00622).
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 19 upheld the Commerce Department's decision to revert to the calculation of a previously used land benchmark as part of a countervailing duty review. Judge Jane Restani said that since no parties contest the move, the court will sustain the agency's third remand results.
A paint sprayer company argued that the parts of its spray nozzles that control the flow of liquid paint are heat sinks, and are excluded from an antidumping duty order on aluminum extrusions from China (Wagner Spray Tech Corp. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00241).
The Commerce Department made no changes to the final results of its countervailing duty administrative review on exporters of South Korean carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate, after a second remand in a case challenging the results of the 2018 review (Nucor Corporation v. U.S., CIT # 21-00182).
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 19 denied a motion seeking to dissolve an existing injunction against liquidation and another seeking to impose a new one in a case involving the antidumping duty rates for several Indian quartz countertop exporters.
The Court of International Trade sustained the International Trade Commission's affirmative injury finding on mattresses from a host of countries despite finding that the commission committed various errors in its assessment of whether the market industry is segmented.