CIT Remands China Off-Road Tires AD/CV Scope Ruling to ITA, Orders Full Analysis

June 28, 2012 by Brian Feito|Penalties and Courts

In a challenge of an International Trade Administration ruling that Chinese off-road tire manufacturer OTR Wheel Engineering, Inc.’s tires are within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on certain new pneumatic off-the-road tires from China (A-570-912 / C-570-913), the Court of International Trade remanded the issue to the ITA to complete a full scope inquiry.

ITA Found Tires In-Scope Because of R-1 & R-4 Tread Type; Did Not Complete Full Analysis

The ITA had found the tires, which plaintiff argued to be for turf, lawn, and garden applications and therefore excluded from the scope, to be within scope based on the R-1 and R-4 tread types of the tires at issue. However, the ITA made this determination based off the descriptions of the merchandise contained in the petition, the initial investigation, and prior ITA and ITC determinations, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.225(k)(1), Finding the (k)(1) factors dispositive, the ITA did not complete an analysis of physical characteristics, purchaser expectations, end-use, channels of trade and the manner of advertising and display provided for by 19 CFR 351.225(k)(2).

CIT Said Evidence Insufficient to Include All R-2 & R-4 Type Treads In-Scope

While CIT declined to overturn the ITA’s scope decision, it found that the (k)(1) factors did not alone sufficiently support for inclusion of the tires in the scope. Specifically, CIT said that, although evidence cited by the ITA may have indicated that some tires containing R-1 and R-4 tread types are designed for general agricultural uses, its evidence did not indicate that other R-1 and R-4 tread type tires are not designed more specifically for use on turf, lawn, and garden vehicles, and are consequently excluded from the scope. CIT said that the ITA’s scope ruling lacked substantial evidence that all tires with R-1 and R-4 tread types are included within the scope of the order. Therefore, CIT remanded the scope ruling back to the ITA to consider the factors enumerated in 19 CFR 351.222(k)(2).

(Slip Op. 12-89, dated 06/27/12, Judge Restani)