The Court of International Trade in a confidential May 19 opinion remanded the Commerce Department's final determination in the countervailing duty investigation on carbon and alloy steel threaded rod from China in a case brought by Chinese exporter Zhejiang Junyue Standard Part Co. The exporter filed the case to contest Commerce's use of adverse facts available over its inability to verify non-use of China's Export Buyer's Credit Program. In a letter on the opinion, Judge Richard Eaton told the parties to review the opinion and tell the court by May 26 if any of the bracketed information should remain confidential or if any non-bracketed information is confidential and should be redacted for the public version (Zhejiang Junyue Standard Part Co. v. United States, CIT #20-00102).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ordered on May 20 that Turkish exporter Borusan Mannesmann's motion for summary affirmance in an antidumping case be held in abeyance. The motion asked the appellate court to affirm the Court of International Trade's ruling, which was one in a long line of rulings finding that the statute does not permit a particular market situation adjustment to the sales-below-cost test. While the U.S. failed to appear in the case, the plaintiff-appellants, led by American Cast Iron Pipe Co., said that they intend to oppose the motion (Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret v. United States, Fed. Cir. #22-1502).

A CBP stay request in a lawsuit challenging an Enforce and Protect Act evasion determination while the agency seeks a covered merchandise referral from Commerce amounts to a delay tactic to extend enforcement in a losing action, Fedmet said in a May 18 motion asking the Court of International Trade to deny the stay (Fedmet Resources Corporation v. United States, CIT #21-00248).

The Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security continued to deny 15 Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion requests from NLMK Pennsylvania in remand results at the Court of International Trade on May 18. BIS said that the U.S. industry has sufficient capacity to make the products that NLMK requested the exclusions for at a "satisfactory quality" (NLMK Pennsylvania v. United States, CIT #21-00507).

The Commerce Department fully addressed the Court of International Trade's questions about why the agency needs certain information from the Chinese government in order to verify that certain exporters' U.S. customers did not use the Export Buyer's Credit Program, a countervailing duty petitioner argued in May 19 comments supporting Commerce's remand. The petitioner, United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers Union, AFL-CIO, said that the "only reasonable way" for Commerce to pursue verification of non-use of the EBCP is through this requested information, so the Chinese government not providing it stands as reasonable grounds for the use of adverse facts available (Cooper (Kunshan) Tire Co. v. United States, CIT #20-00113).

CBP improperly denied an importer's "mixed use" drawback claim, despite provisions in CBP's regulations allowing claims based on imports used for both pre- and post-Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act (TFTEA) drawback, an importer told the Court of International Trade in a complaint filed May 16 (Parkdale America LLC v. United States, CIT #22-00019).

The Canadian Government, along with its other plaintiffs in a countervailing duty case, will appeal a March Court of International Trade decision upholding the Commerce Department's positions on all five issues under contention in a dispute involving wind towers from Canada. According to the May 16 notice of appeal, the Canadian Government, along with the Government of Quebec, Marmen Inc., Marmen Energie and Marmen Energy Co., will take their case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (The Government of Quebec v. United States, CIT Consol. #20-00168).

Judge Gary Katzmann of the Court of International Trade approved a May 14 motion by TR International Trading Company to make its ongoing case a test case and suspend two similar cases under the proceeding (Thatcher Company v. United States, CIT No. 20-00067, 21-cv-00357).

South Korean exporter Husteel Co. challenged the Commerce Department's decision to use one antidumping duty mandatory respondent's third-country sales to calculate another mandatory respondent's constructed value profit, selling expenses and constructed export price profit. Filing its complaint on May 16 at the Court of International Trade, Husteel, a non-examined company in the relevant AD review, also argued that Commerce violated the law in its application of neutral facts available over the calculation of one of the respondent's U.S. affiliate's yield loss on further manufacturing operations (Husteel Co., Ltd. v. United States, CIT #22-00143).

The Court of International Trade in a May 17 order granted a stay requested by the plaintiffs in an antidumping duty scope dispute, led by Chinese exporter Zhejiang Yuhua Timber Co. but contested by the U.S. As such, consideration of the U.S.'s motion to dimsiss and all other proceedings will be stayed until 21 days after the Commerce Department issues its final decision in the changed circumstances review over the AD investigation on multilayered wood flooring from China, the court said (Zhejiang Yuhua Timber Co. v. United States, CIT #21-00502).