After finding it was inappropriate to calculate Universal Tube and Plastic Industries’ dumping margin by comparing the selling prices of U.S. and home market sales made in different quarters, Commerce "did exactly that" in its differential pricing analysis, said Universal, THL Tube and Pipe Industries and KHK Scaffolding and Formwork in their Oct. 26 motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade. Comparing Universal’s selling prices in different quarters of the review period was unlawful because it had separately determined that selling price comparisons of Universal’s sales across quarters was impermissible, said Universal in its request to remand the issue back to Commerce (Universal Tube and Plastic Industries v. U.S., CIT # 23-00113).

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The Commerce Department properly calculated the manufacturing overhead ratio in an antidumping duty review because the agency complied with the Court of International Trade's remand order regarding the calculation, the trade court said in an Oct. 30 opinion. Judge Richard Eaton said Commerce legally used the amount for indirect production expenses in the ratio's numerator while stating its reasons for subtracting energy costs from this number and placing them in the denominator, as instructed.

The U.S. asked the Court of International Trade to treat "certain portions of the administrative record as highly sensitive documents" in a case against Chinese printer cartridge maker Ninestar Corp.'s addition to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List. Following a spat on whether to allow the government to amend the protective order in the suit, the U.S. is now asking for certain protections for information on the record since, if revealed, the information "could pose a danger of physical harm to certain persons" (Ninestar Corp. v. United States, CIT # 23-00182).

The Court of International Trade shouldn't reinstate the Commerce Department's exclusion of four Canadian lumber exporters as part of the countervailing duty investigation on softwood lumber products from Canada, the CVD petitioner said in an Oct. 27 brief at the Court of International Trade. The petitioner, the committee Overseeing Action for Lumber International Trade Investigations or Negotiations, said that the four exporters' "mere assertions" that changed circumstances exist, warranting the retroactive exclusion of the companies, is not enough (Committee Overseeing Action for Lumber International Trade Investigations or Negotiations v. United States, CIT # 19-00122).

The Commerce Department should find that there was a gap in the official record and apply adverse inferences to German thermal paper exporter Koehler if the case is remanded, U.S. thermal paper makers Domtar and Appvion said in their Oct. 26 answers to the Court of International Trade's questions before upcoming oral arguments, scheduled for Nov. 1 (Matra Americas v. U.S., CIT # 21-00632).

Importer Cherish Your Health Food "failed to exercise reasonable care and competence" in submitting import documents related to its entries of fresh garlic from China, the U.S. said in an Oct. 30 complaint at the Court of International Trade. As a result of the company's "negligent violations" of customs laws, the U.S. is seeking over $254,000 related to a group of three entries, dubbed "Group A," it said (United States v. Cherish Your Health Food, CIT # 23-00230).

The U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 30 denied a petition for writ of certiorari regarding one question on Nebraska man Byungmin Chae's customs broker license exam. Chae took the test in April 2018 and subsequently took the result through multiple levels of administrative and judicial appeal before seeking Supreme Court review. He will remain one correct answer shy of the 75% threshold needed to pass the exam (Byungmin Chae v. Janet Yellen, U.S. Sup. Ct. # 23-200).

The Court of International Trade in an Oct. 30 opinion sustained the Commerce Department's remand results in a case on the 2017-18 antidumping review of multilayered wood flooring from China. Judge Richard Eaton said Commerce properly calculated the surrogate manufacturing overhead ratio by using the indirect production expenses amount in the numerator and listing its reasons for taking out energy costs and putting them in the denominator. The judge also upheld the use of Romania's International Labor Organization data to calculate the surrogate's hourly labor value, saying "the data reflects hours actually worked in the surrogate country."

Canadian exporter Tolko Industries, a non-individually examined company in the 2021 review of the antidumping duty order on Canadian softwood lumber, said its 6.2% dumping rate was not backed by substantial evidence. Filing a complaint at the Court of International Trade on Oct. 27, Tolko said that since its rate was derived from rates for the two mandatory respondents which themselves were not supported by substantial evidence, its rate is illegal (Tolko Industries v. United States, CIT # 23-00204).