The Court of International Trade does not have jurisdiction under 19 U.S.C. Section 1581(i) -- the court's "residual" jurisdiction -- to hear a case over whether former counsel for Amsted Rail Co. should be barred from certain antidumping and countervailing proceedings, the U.S. told the court. Concurrently filing an opposition to ARC's motion for a preliminary injunction, which would bar ARC's former counsel, Daniel Pickard and law firm Buchanan Ingersoll, from participating in the proceedings, and a motion to dismiss, the U.S. said that the court does not have jurisdiction to hear the case and that the plaintiffs are not likely to succeed in the matter (Amsted Rail Co. v. United States, CIT #22-00316).
The Commerce Department issued the final results of an antidumping duty administrative review on pasta from Italy (A-475-818). These final results will be used to set final assessments of AD duties on importers for subject merchandise entered July 1, 2020, through June 30, 2021.
The Commerce Department issued the final results of the antidumping duty administrative review on glycine from India (A-533-883). Commerce set AD rates for three companies under review that had shipments during the period of review, making calculation changes to its preliminary determinations that resulted in a lower rate than in the preliminary results. New AD duty cash deposit rates take effect Nov. 10, the date these final results were published in the Federal Register.
The Commerce Department published the final results of the antidumping duty administrative review on citric acid and certain citrate salts from Colombia (A-301-803). Commerce assigned the only company under review, Sucroal S.A., an AD rate of 3.58%. Subject merchandise from Sucroal entered July 1, 2020, through June 30, 2021, will be liquidated at importer-specific assessment rates. The new 3.58% AD cash deposit rate for Sucroal takes effect Nov. 10.
A listing of recent Commerce Department antidumping and countervailing duty messages posted to CBP's website Nov. 9, along with the case number(s) and CBP message number, is provided below. The messages are available by searching for the listed CBP message number at CBP's ADCVD Search page.
Antidumping petitioner Ellwood City Co. failed to preserve its objection to the Commerce Department's use of a questionnaire in light of on-site verification by not exhausting administrative remedies, the Court of International Trade ruled in a Nov. 8 opinion. Judge Stephen Vaden said Ellwood City had many chances to object to the verification methodology in the AD investigation, but it never did. However, the case was remanded to Commerce over defendant-intervenor and AD respondent BGH Edelstahl Siegen's challenge to Commerce's use of a particular market situation adjustment to the sales-below-cost test.
The Commerce Department published notices in the Federal Register Nov. 9 on the following AD/CV duty proceedings (any notices that announce changes to AD/CV duty rates, scope, affected firms or effective dates will be detailed in another ITT article):
The Commerce Department issued the final results of the antidumping duty administrative review on wooden cabinets and vanities from China (A-570-106). These final results will be used to set final assessments of AD duties on importers for subject merchandise entered Oct. 9, 2019, through March 31, 2021.
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Nov. 9 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The Commerce Department has recognized a Chinese company's name change for the purposes of antidumping duties on wooden cabinets and vanities from China (A-570-106). The agency upheld its preliminary finding (see 2205060018) that Jiang Su Rongxin Wood Industry Co., Ltd. (Rongxin Wood) is the successor-in-interest to Jiangsu Rongxin Cabinets Co., Ltd. (Rongxin Cabinets), in the final results of a changed circumstances review published Nov. 9. The agency found that Rongxin Wood operates as the same business entity other than the change in name. Commerce determined that Rongxin Wood is assigned the AD duty rate previously assigned to Rongxin Cabinets (see 2211090008).