The Court of International Trade in a confidential Aug. 21 opinion again sent back the Commerce Department's decision not to investigate the alleged off-peak sale of electricity below cost as part of the 2018 review of the countervailing duty order on carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from South Korea. Judge Mark Barnett also remanded for a second time the agency's decision not to treat POSCO Plantec, an affiliate of respondent POSCO, as a cross-owned input supplier of POSCO regarding the supply of scrap (Nucor Corp. v. United States, CIT # 21-00182).

Importer Skyview Cabinet USA will appeal a June ruling by the Court of International Trade that it evaded antidumping and countervailing duty orders on wooden cabinets and vanities from China to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, according to an Aug. 18 filing (Skyview Cabinet USA v. U.S., CIT # 22-00080). In June, CIT upheld the results of an Enforce and Protect Act investigation of Skyview that found the company had evaded AD by claiming the goods were made by Malaysia-based manufacturer Rowenda Kitchen (See 2109300059). In his June opinion, Judge Stephen Vaden said CBP had correctly found that inconsistencies in submissions were enough for Commerce to find Skyview's submission non-credible and that the record backed the evasion finding (see 2306200059).

Importers American Pacific Plywood, U.S. Global Forest and InterGlobal Forest will appeal a June opinion by the Court of International Trade, which ruled that CBP did not misapply the substantial evidence standard when it found the three importers evaded the antidumping and countervailing duties on hardwood plywood products from China, according to an Aug. 18 filing (American Pacific Plywood v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 20-03914). In his June opinion, Judge M. Miller Baker found that the importers didn't support their theory that CBP didn't comply with the objective "reasonable mind" standard. Baker said that the importers' lack of access to all the confidential information in the suit does not constitute a due process violation (see 2306300033).

The Court of International Trade denied a government motion for judgment and ruled in favor of the defendant, American Home Assurance Company (AHAC), in a case centered on when the six-year statute of limitations begins for customs bonds, according to an Aug. 18 judgment. Though the opinion is still confidential, the judgment shows that CIT Judge Richard Eaton denied the government's motion for summary judgment and granted AHAC's motion, thereby ending the action. All claims asserted were dismissed with prejudice and Eaton ordered that each party would bear its own costs and expenses (U.S. v. American Home Assurance Co., CIT # 20-00175).

The Court of International Trade upheld July remand results from the Commerce Department that saw the weighted-average dumping margin for antidumping duty respondent Suzano drop from 32.31% to 8.63%. The remand was the second in a case challenging the third administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain uncoated paper from Brazil (Suzano S.A. v. U.S., CIT # 21-00069).

CBP improperly disallowed valuation using the first sale rule of imported woodworking tools, importer Woodcraft Supply said in an Aug. 16 complaint at the Court of International Trade. The woodworking specialty retailer argued that purchases from its Taiwanese vendors were made "at arms length" and that the court should order the reliquidation of its imported merchandise appraised using first sale value (Woodcraft Supply v. U.S., CIT # 22-00252).

A group of solar companies led by JA Solar asked the Court of International Trade on Aug. 16 for the opportunity to conduct oral arguments in a countervailing duty case involving the non-use of China's Export Buyer's Credit Program (Risen Energy Co. v. U.S. CIT # 22-00231).

The Commerce Department is set to lower Hyundai Steel Co.'s dumping margin from 19.54% to 9.63% in the 2019-2020 antidumping duty administrative review on certain oil country tubular goods from South Korea, in remand results released Aug. 16. Commerce said that it reconsidered and changed the methodology by which it calculated the constructed export price (CEP) profit for Hyundai but did not change the calculation of the constructed value (CV) profit and selling expenses and CV profit cap (Hyundai Steel Co., et al. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00138).

The Commerce Department's remand results correctly complied with the remand order issued by the Court of International Trade, plywood exporter Interglobal Forest said in its Aug. 14 reply. On remand, Commerce concluded that hardwood plywood made using two-ply panels imported into Vietnam from China before being reexported to the U.S. by the Vietnam Finewood Company Ltd. were outside the scope of antidumping and countervailing duty orders on hardwood plywood from China (Far East American v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 22-00049).

The U.S. urged the Court of International Trade to uphold the Commerce Department's remand results in which it found that Vietnam Finewood Co.'s hardwood plywood made using two-ply panels imported to Vietnam from China is not subject to the scope of the AD/CVD orders on hardwood plywood from China. Submitting remand comments to the court, the agency said that since no party contests the remand results, the court should uphold them (Far East American v. United States, CIT Consol. # 22-00049).