The Commerce Department did not adequately explain its finding that ship building company Nur Gemicilik ve Tic, an affiliate of countervailing duty respondent Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret, was a cross-owned input supplier of primarily dedicated inputs, the Court of International Trade ruled. Sending back the 2018 administrative review of the CVD order on rebar from Turkey, Judge Gary Katzmann said Commerce erroneously relied on prior segments of the review and a past CIT decision to say that "scrap" is an input primarily dedicated to the production of downstream steel products.

Steel importers led by PrimeSource Building Products petitioned for an en banc rehearing of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision to uphold President Donald Trump's expansion of the Section 232 national security tariffs on steel and aluminum "derivative" products. The companies said that if the decision stands, the president "will enjoy unbounded legislative power to regulate foreign trade -- to take any action, at any time, targeting any imported product," as long as the commerce secretary makes a threat determination on the targeted product or any material used to make that product (PrimeSource Building Products v. U.S., Fed. Cir. #21-2066).

The Commerce Department has the statutory authority to conduct expedited countervailing duty reviews, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held April 25. Reversing a Court of International Trade ruling overturning the agency's authority to carry out such reviews, Judges Timothy Dyk, Jimmie Reyna and Richard Taranto said the legal ground for the review process is found in the Uruguay Round Agreements Act's enactment of certain provisions that favor individual company determinations and the URAA's "grant of regulatory-implementation power to Commerce."

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 U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld CBP's decision not to grant credit to customs broker license exam test taker Byungmin Chae of Elkhorn, Nebraska, for two questions on the April 2018 exam. Judges Pauline Newman, Sharon Prost and Todd Hughes granted Chae credit for one of three questions he challenged, but that was insufficient to bring him up to the 75% threshold needed to pass the test.

DOJ said it recently discovered that it made inaccurate statements in a now-concluded case involving tobacco excise taxes for cigar wrappers, telling the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in an April 21 motion that it said samples of the goods relied on in the case were from from a specific entry when they were not, and that it has only identified the source of six of the nine samples considered by the court (New Image Global v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 19-2444).

The Court of International Trade upheld the Commerce Department's refusal to adjust its threshold for differentiating between types of pasta in its duty calculations in the 2018-19 review of the antidumping duty order on pasta from Italy. Respondent La Molisana had argued the agency's "breakpoint" of 12.5% protein content did not reflect the market reality, saying the true point separating premium from regular pasta was 13.5% protein content. In his April 24 opinion, Judge Richard Eaton said the company's evidence, while unrebutted, was not applicable industrywide, making it "unreliable and insufficient."

The Commerce Department wrongly said there was ambiguity in the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on hardwood plywood from China, the Court of International Trade ruled. Judge Mark Barnett, remanding Commerce's scope ruling, said the scope language and the (k)(1) sources confirm the "unambiguous" meaning of the orders' scope, which excludes two-ply panels imported from China to Vietnam.

There is "absolutely no substantive justification" to give the Commerce Department another 91 days to review NLMK Pennsylvania's Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion requests, the company argued in an April 20 brief opposing the extension bid at the Court of International Trade (NLMK Pennsylvania v. United States, CIT # 21-00507).

The Commerce Department properly found that a particular market situation did not exist in South Korea affecting inputs for oil country tubular goods from South Korea, the Court of International Trade ruled in a case on an antidumping review on Korean OCTG. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said the agency legally found that hot-rolled coil imports from China and South Korea's electricity market did not constitute a PMS.