CIT Affirms De Minimis Rates for 16 Vietnam Companies in 2007-08 Shrimp AD Case

The Court of International Trade affirmed the International Trade Administration’s voluntary remand redetermination of the final results of the 2007-08 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on frozen warmwater shrimp from Vietnam (A-552-802). The ITA had requested the voluntary remand to correct the methodology it used to determine the AD rate for 16 non-individually selected separate rate respondents, pursuant to earlier CIT rulings against this methodology with respect to the 2006-07 review of the same AD order.

As in the earlier CIT case, in this case the ITA had originally assigned an AD rate based on the most recent rate calculated for the non-selected companies in question (4.57% for 2007-08) in a attempt to avoid assigning an AD rate based on the average of the individually selected respondents, all of whom had been assigned de minimis rates. The voluntary remand redetermination at issue in this case instead assigned the average of the individually selected respondents’ AD rates (0.26%, de minimis) to the 16 non-selected companies¹. Although U.S. defendant-intervenors challenged the ITA’s remand redetermination, CIT disagreed, and affirmed.

¹The 16 Vietnamese companies to receive de minimis rates are: Amanda Foods (Vietnam) Ltd; Bac Liu Fisheries Joint Stock Company; Cadovimex-Vietnam; Cafatex Fishery Joint Stock Corporation; Cam Ranh Seafoods Processing Enterprise Company; Cuulong Seaproducts Company; Danang Seaproducts Import Export Corporation; Minh Hai Export Frozen Seafood Processing Joint Stock Company; Minh Hai Joint-Stock Seafoods Processing Company; Minh Hai Sea Procuts Processing Company; Ngoc Sing Private Enterprise; Nha Trang Seaproduct Company; Phu Cuong Seafood Processing and Import-Export Co., Ltd.; Sao Ta Foods Joint Stock Company; Soc Trang Seafood Joint Stock Company; and UTXI Aquatic Products Processing Corporation. The remaining 9 separate rate, non-individually investigated respondents either did not challenge the ITA's final results or signed a stipulation of dismissal, and therefore are not subject to this remand.

(Slip Op. 12-68, dated 05/30/12, Judge Pogue)