Chinese exporter Jilin Bright Future Chemicals did not exhaust its administrative remedies in challenging calculations in an administrative review on activated carbon from China, but it can still raise an issue with the calculations because Commerce didn't finalize its methodology until the final results, the company argued in its Oct. 24 reply brief at the Court of International Trade (Jilin Bright Future Chemicals Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00336).

The proceeding against U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Judge Pauline Newman has "violated the basic norms of due process of law and are inconsistent with constitutional protections" for federal judges, Newman argued in a reply to a motion to dismiss from Judges Kimberly Moore, Sharon Prost and Richard Taranto -- the trio who investigated Newman. Fighting off the dismissal bid in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the 96-year old Newman said the three judges' actions, which amounted to a one-year suspension for Newman, "were designed to accomplish a preordained result, whether legal or not" (The Hon. Pauline Newman v. The Hon. Kimberly A. Moore, D.D.C. # 23-01334).

The Court of International Trade in an Oct. 25 text-only order denied as moot the renewed motion by the U.S. to stay proceedings in an Enforce and Protect Act case, pending final resolution of a related matter. The present case, Far East American v. U.S., concerns an antidumping and countervailing duty evasion determination on two-ply hardwood products from China. The government asked for a stay while another case brought by Far East American went through the trade court. CIT ruled on that one in August, finding that the Commerce Department properly excluded hardwood plywood made by Vietnam Finewood using two-ply panels imported into Vietnam from China from the scope of the orders (see 2308220033). The stay in Far East American's second case was dropped following the ruling (Far East American v. U.S., CIT # 22-00213).

A horizontal lawnmower engine shouldn't have been included under the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on vertical shaft engines between 99cc and up to 225cc from China in a Commerce Department scope ruling because it was "clearly excluded" by the scope language, Zhejiang Amerisun Technology said in an Oct. 24 brief at the Court of International Trade (Zhejiang Amerisun Technology Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00011).

The U.S. asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for approval to use 3,000 more words in its reply brief in a case on the use of the Cohen's d test to root out "masked" dumping. The government said each of the three issues raised in the case is "complex and technical in nature." It said they cover two accounting issues and the intricacies of a statistical method, creating "good cause" for the additional words (Marmen v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1877).

The Commerce Department improperly rescinded the antidumping and countervailing duty reviews on wood moldings and millwork products from China as to exporters China Cornici Co. and RaoPing HongRong Handicrafts Co., the two companies argued in a pair of complaints at the Court of International Trade (China Cornici Co. v. United States, CIT # 23-00216, -00217).

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Judges Kimberly Moore, Sharon Prost and Richard Taranto's motion for the establishment of a dispute resolution process in Judge Pauline Newman's suit against the three judges' fitness investigation on the 96-year-old judge. The D.C. court said in the text-only order that the parties are to contact Chief Circuit Mediator Robert Frost for further directions on establishing the dispute resolution procedure (The Hon. Pauline Newman v. The Hon. Kimberly A. Moore, D.D.C. # 23-01334).

The Commerce Department's decision to initiate an antidumping duty investigation on oil country tubular goods from Argentina was based on data from an "anomalous period" in 2020 with "unprecedented market conditions" that were unrepresentative of the OCTG market, plaintiffs led by Tenaris Bay City said in an Oct. 20 support motion at the Court of International Trade (Tenaris Bay City, et al. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00343).

The government hasn't justified its decision to keep a vast majority of the information confidential as part of Chinese printer cartridge maker Ninestar Corp.'s case against its placement on the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List, Ninestar argued. Filing its opposition to the U.S.'s motion to enter an amended protective order on Oct. 23 at the Court of International Trade, the exporter said the motion would "give the Government essentially unreviewable discretion to seal information, placing it beyond Ninestar's review" and is just "another bid for delay and distraction" (Ninestar Corp. v. United States, CIT # 23-00182).

Imported ether glycol used in the manufacture of high-performance polyurethane elastomers is a synthetic wax and properly classified as such rather than as an epoxy resin, importer Gantrade said in its Oct. 23 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Gantrade v. U.S., CIT # 21-00551).