The Court of International Trade in a Nov. 17 opinion sustained the International Trade Commission's final affirmative critical circumstances determination on raw honey from Vietnam, which led to the retroactive imposition of duties due to the timing and volume of imports. Judge Leo Gordon said "the four corners of the record do not support" the legal or evidentiary claims from importers, led by Sweet Harvest Foods. The judge said the plaintiffs failed to convince the court that the phrase "order to be issued" in the statutory mandate means ITC must find that imports are "likely to undermine seriously the remedial effect of the antidumping order to be issued." The importers also failed to convince the judge "how or why the statute would limit the time period" for the analysis to only the 90-day retroactive period instead of having it mirror the same period Commerce Department reviewed in its analysis.

The Court of International Trade in a Nov. 17 opinion remanded parts of the Commerce Department's 2017 review of the countervailing duty order on solar cells from China. Judge Jane Restani again sent back Commerce's use of adverse facts available against respondent Risen Energy for its supposed use of China's Export Buyer's Credit Program, saying the agency imposed an "onerous level of certification" on Risen because the requirements "impede good faith efforts by respondents to comply." In addition, Restani sent back Commerce's land benchmark formula, which the agency came up with on remand, for violating the remand order's scope.

The Court of International Trade in a Nov. 15 opinion partially ended an antidumping duty case for one of two plaintiffs, German exporter Salzgitter Mannesmann Grobblech, since its claims already have been resolved by the court. Salzgitter challenged the use of adverse facts available on its sales for which the company could not identify or report the manufacturer in the AD investigation of cut-to-length carbon and alloy steel plate from Germany.

Antidumping and countervailing duty petitioner Magnum Magnetics Corp. will appeal a September Court of International Trade decision excluding importer Siffron's plastic shelf dividers from the AD/CVD orders on raw flexible magnets from China. In the opinion, the trade court said the Commerce Department reasonably found that the scope language and the (k)(1) sources, including prior scope rulings and an International Trade Commission report, established that the dividers didn't belong in the scope of the orders (see 2309260049). The petitioner said in its Nov. 14 notice of appeal that it will take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Magnum Magnetics Corp. v. United States, CIT # 22-00254).

Importer Midwest Air Technologies' swaged line and corner posts should be classified as parts for structures under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 7308, and not under a heading 7306 as "other tubes," Midwest Air said in a Nov. 14 complaint at the Court of International Trade. The company said that a prior customs ruling covering "the same or substantially similar merchandise" shows that swaged line and corner posts fit under heading 7308 and not 7306, freeing the company of Section 232 steel and aluminum duty liability (Midwest Air Technologies v. United States, CIT # 23-00240).

The Commerce Department again failed to adhere to the Court of International Trade's order concerning the agency's phosphate rock benefit calculations regarding countervailing duty respondent JSC Apatit's mining rights, exporter Phosagro and its affiliate, Apatit, argued in remand comments at the trade court. The companies said that the remand results, which didn't make any changes to its position in the CVD investigation of phosphate fertilizers from Russia, ignored the court's mandate regarding Commerce's use of Apatit's Profit Before Tax figure in its profit ratio instead of its Gross Profit Figure (The Mosaic Co. v. United States, CIT # 21-00117).

The Commerce Department failed to show on remand that antidumping duty respondent Nexco's acquisition prices are a "reasonable proxy for the cost of production of raw honey" as part of the AD investigation on raw honey from Argentina, Nexco said in remand comments at the Court of International Trade. Commerce's policy regarding unprocessed raw agricultural products where it bases cost of production on the cost of making the raw goods, even when the respondent isn't the producer, stands "in contrast to Commerce's policy regarding processed agricultural products where the exporter is the producer," the brief said (Nexco v. United States, CIT # 22-00203).

The Court of International Trade in a Nov. 15 opinion partially ended an antidumping case for one of two plaintiffs, German exporter Salzgitter Mannesmann Grobblech, saying the court already had resolved its claims. Salzgitter challenged the use of adverse facts available on sales for which the company could not identify or report the manufacturer in the AD investigation of cut-to-length carbon and alloy steel plate from Germany. Judge Leo Gordon earlier sustained Commerce's use of AFA but now entered partial judgment against Salzgitter after finding the remaining issues do not affect the company, giving it a chance to appeal before final resolution of the case.

The U.S. articulated a theory of fraud but did not "plead fraud with particularity" in its case against importer Katana Racing seeking over $5.7 million in unpaid safeguard duties on Chinese tires, Katana argued in a renewed motion to dismiss at the Court of International Trade. Again seeking to dispatch of the case following the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's remand kicking the matter back to the trade court, the importer said the govenrment's case did not touch on the "who, what, when, where, and how of the alleged fraud" as required by the Supreme Court in making a pleading, particularly one for fraud (United States v. Katana Racing, CIT # 19-00125).

The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade: