The Court of International Trade on June 23 upheld the Commerce Department's use of exporter Dillinger Huttenwerke's likely selling price, taken from its books, to value the cost of production of its non-prime merchandise in an antidumping investigation. Judge Leo Gordon said the company's failure to fill the record with actual COP data for the non-prime products in the AD case on steel cut-to-length plate from Germany justified the agency's decision to use the likely selling price as a fill-in.

A supermodule for use in hydrogen fuel-cell power plants is a part an electric generator and not a water gas generator, DOJ said in a June 20 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. Importer HyAxium's arguments to the contrary do not consider the supermodule in its entirety and the unit does not generate water gas, DOJ said (HyAxium v. U.S., CIT # 21-00057).

The Commerce Department in a June 22 brief requested a partial voluntary remand at the Court of International Trade so it can fix a mistake in its decision to grant a byproduct offset for antidumping duty respondent NTSF Seafoods Joint Stock Co. The agency said it wanted the chance to review the decision after looking at evidence submitted by petitioner Catfish Farmers of America so that it can "reconsider the narrow issue of potential double counting" with regard to byproduct offsets that NTSF received (Catfish Farmers of America v. U.S., CIT # 20-00105).

Certain claims from conservation groups Sea Shepherd New Zealand and Sea Shepherd Conservation Society may continue despite the fact that the administrative decision they are challenging has expired, the Court of International Trade ruled in a June 21 opinion. Judge Gary Katzmann said that an element of Sea Shepherd's challenge is capable of repetition from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and evading review, allowing a claim seeking declaratory relief to proceed. But because the decision expired, the judge said the prospect of injunctive relief was moot.

The Commerce Department incorrectly concluded that exemptions from Turkey's Bank and Insurance Transactions Tax (BITT) were countervailable subsidies, in the final results of the 2020 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on steel concrete reinforcing bar from Turkey, exporter Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret said in a June 21 complaint. Kaptan also took issue with Commerce's valuation benchmark for industrial land in Turkey (Kaptan Demir Çelik Endüstrisi ve Ticaret A.Ş. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00131).

The Commerce Department made subsidies an "afterthought" when it failed to properly evaluate their impact on potential surrogates in a case involving the administrative review of an antidumping duty order on steel nails from Oman, AD respondent Oman Fasteners told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a June 16 response brief (Mid Continent Steel & Wire v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1039).

The Court of International Trade on June 20 upheld CBP's finding that importer Skyview Cabinet USA evaded the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on wooden cabinets and vanities from China. Judge Stephen Vaden said that, contrary to Skyview's claims, CBP adequately found that "contradictions, omissions, and inconsistencies" in the company's submissions were enough to find the data to not be credible and that the record backs the evasion findings against the firm.

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 complied with a remand order from the Court of International Trade by adding a respondent to its antidumping duty investigation on utility-scale wind towers from Spain, but did not alter its all-others rate, in remand results submitted to the trade court June 16 (Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy v. U.S., CIT # 21-00449).

The Commerce Department said that hardwood plywood exported to the U.S. by the Vietnam Finewood Company made using two-ply panels imported into Vietnam from China are outside the scope of antidumping and countervailing duties on hardwood plywood from China, in remand results submitted to the Court of International Trade on June 15. The agency said under protest that the goods are not subject to the duties since the trade court ruled that the scope language "unambiguously" shows that the orders do not include Chinese two-ply panels (Vietnam Finewood Company v. United States, CIT # 22-00049).