The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a June 10 order invited the U.S. to file an amicus brief in a case on whether the Commerce Department can conduct expedited countervailing duty reviews. The plaintiff-appellants, led by Fontaine Inc., filed their opening brief in February, seeking statutory cover for Commerce to perform the expedited reviews (Committee Overseeing Action for Lumber International Trade Investigations or Negotiations v. United States, Fed. Cir. #22-1021).

The government may only file counterclaims at the Court of International Trade in cases that involve imported merchandise, NetJets said in a June 8 motion seeking dismissal of a DOJ counterclaim seeking liquidated damages from the company for its failure to collect customs user fees (CUFs) for airline ticket purchases (NetJets Aviation, Inc. v. U.S., CIT #21-00142).

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

The Commerce Department in June 9 remand results filed at the Court of International Trade no longer found that a particular market situation existed in India regarding the price of hot-rolled coil. Making the switch under protest, Commerce said that since it found that a PMS no longer exists, the other remanded issues in the case are moot (Garg Tube Export v. United States, CIT #20-00026).

The Court of International Trade should dismiss an importer's lawsuit that improperly challenges CBP assessments of antidumping and countervailing duties rather than the underlying duty calculations done by the Commerce Department, the government said in a June 8 brief. The trade court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the complaint because the true nature of importer Rimco's claim is a challenge to the amount of duties determined by Commerce rather than the enforcement by CBP, DOJ said. The protest and subsequent suit are an attempt to "hide its own failure to challenge Commerce's determinations when it had the opportunity" by essentially circumventing administrative avenues for addressing AD/CVD rate calculations, the government said (Rimco v. United States, CIT #21-00537).

The Court of International Trade in a confidential June 9 opinion remanded the Commerce Department's final determination in the antidumping duty investigation on biodiesel from Indonesia. In the investigation, Commerce disregarded exporter Wilmar Bioenergi Indonesia's home market sales and nearly all of its reported costs due to a particular market situation in Indonesia. The agency said the PMS existed based on a Public Service Obligation program that requires biodiesel producers to sell a certain amount of biodiesel in Indonesia at a market-set price. Commerce also found a PMS for Wilmar's crude palm oil costs based on the Indonesian government's export tax and export levy on CPO, which lowers its cost. In a letter filed about the confidential opinion, Judge Richard Eaton gave the parties until June 16 to review any confidential information (Wilmar Trading Pte Ltd. v. United States, CIT #18-00121).

The Commerce Department improperly relied on the Cohen's d statistical test when deciding to use an "average-to-transaction" as opposed to an "average-to-average" comparison of sales to calculate exporter HiSteel's dumping margin, HiSteel argued in a June 8 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Commerce used the test without establishing the conditions needed to make the test work as pointed out in a recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit case, the exporter said (HiSteel Co. v. United States, CIT #22-00142).

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

The Court of International Trade in a June 7 order granted the U.S.'s bid for a stay in an Enforce and Protect Act case, halting proceedings until the Commerce Department issues its final determination in the relevant covered merchandise referral matter. The case concerns Fedmet Resources' challenge of a 2020 EAPA determination, in which CBP found that Fedmet had evaded the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on magnesia alumina carbon (MAC) bricks from China. On April 27, CBP requested a stay to seek a covered merchandise referral from Commerce because it says that it's unable to determine whether the bricks it tested are covered merchandise (see 2204270072) (Fedmet Resources v. U.S., CIT #21-00248).