The Commerce Department rejected a submission from respondent Assan Aluminyum as untimely in its third remand results in a case on the antidumping duty investigation on common alloy aluminum sheet from Turkey at the Court of International Trade. Despite accepting the submission in its second remand results, the agency said on remand that the information in the submission didn't correct information from the company's earlier submission but rather was an "untimely effort by Assan to supplement its own prior questionnaire response" (Assan Aluminyum Sanayi ve Ticaret v. United States, CIT Consol. # 21-00246).

The U.S. defended the Commerce Department's 2019-20 review of the antidumping duty order on tapered roller bearings from China before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, backing, among other things, the agency's decision to rely on the financial statements of Timken Romania alone as part of its surrogate value calculations and the decision to deduct the cost of Section 301 duties from respondent Shanghai Tainai Bearing's U.S. price (Shanghai Tainai Bearing Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 25-1405).

Two companies, Rugby Holdings and Hardwoods Specialty Products, dropped their challenges to the Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available in anti-circumvention inquiries regarding antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on hardwood plywood from China. Counsel for the companies didn't immediately respond to requests for comment (Rugby Holdings LLC v. United States, CIT #s 25-00119, -00122) (Hardwoods Specialty Products US v. United States, CIT #s 25-00117, -00121).

Petitioner Giorgio Foods on Sept. 8 said it will appeal a recent Court of International Trade decision regarding the antidumping duty investigation on Dutch mushrooms to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In the decision, Judge M. Miller Baker said the Commerce Department permissibly picked Germany as the third country for determining AD respondent Prochamp's normal value, which ultimately led to a zero percent dumping margin for the respondent (see 2507160066). Specifically, Baker said the agency fully supported its efforts to account for the percentage of Prochamp's product sold to Germany that is actually resold in another country and, thus, its finding that Germany remained the best comparison market (Giorgio Foods v. United States, CIT # 23-00133).

The Court of International Trade on Sept. 3 sustained the Commerce Department's application of its quarterly cost methodology to analyze exporter Officine Tecnosider's sales during the 2020-21 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on steel plate from Italy. Judge Claire Kelly said Commerce adequately explained its approach, which stemmed from difficulties using Tecnosider's U.S. sales to analyze correlations between sales and costs of production, and why it "produces reasonable and reliable results."

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.

Judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit last week appeared skeptical of arguments made by counsel for Midwest-CBK that its goods sent to U.S. customers from Canadian warehouses weren't sold "for exportation into the United States" and thus were properly liquidated using deductive value (Midwest-CBK v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1142).

The Court of International Trade on Sept. 6 said enforcement of Pacer's updated password standards has been "temporarily delayed" in light of long wait times over the weekend at the Pacer Service Center. The court asked that "only users who receive a prompt to enroll in [multifactor authentication] when they log in should do so." Otherwise, "no action is necessary."

Detroit Axle, the company challenging President Donald Trump's decision to eliminate the de minimis threshold on goods from China, moved to set aside the Court of International Trade's stay of its case pending the lead suit on tariff action taken under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The company said while the relief it's seeking initially overlapped with the relief sought by the plaintiffs in the lead tariff suit, that's "no longer the case" in light of Trump's recent executive order rescinding the de minimis threshold globally (Axle of Dearborn d/b/a Detroit Axle v. United States, CIT # 25-00091).

In oral arguments Sept. 5, steel rebar petitioner Rebar Trade Action Coalition and Turkish exporter Kaptan Demir attempted to define whether a Turkish shipbuilding company, which sold scrap to Kaptan during the review period, was the exporter’s cross-owned input supplier (Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 24-1431).