The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Jan. 10 issued its mandate in a case on the Commerce Department's use of a particular market situation adjustment to the sales-below-cost test in antidumping duty cases. In the opinion, the appellate court sustained Commerce's remand results dropping the adjustment for two respondents to the 2018 AD review of circular welded carbon steel pipes from Thailand (see 2312040025). The court said petitioner Wheatland Tube Co. failed to distinguish the case from the holding in Hyundai Steel v. U.S., in which the court first ruled against the PMS adjustment (Saha Thai Steel Pipe Public Co. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-1175).

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

The Court of International Trade issued its judgment in a customs case on action camera maker GoPro Inc.'s camera housings just under two weeks after issuing its opinion in the case. In the Dec. 28 opinion, the court said the camera housings are camera parts and not cases, able to enter the U.S. duty-free (see 2312280038). On Jan. 9, Judge Timothy Reif granted GoPro's motion for summary judgment (GoPro Inc. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 20-00176).

The U.S. defended the results, on voluntary remand, of its antidumping duty investigation on forged steel fluid end blocks from Germany, saying the Commerce Department wasn't allowed to adjust its calculations of an exporter’s costs of production in response to a particular market situation (Ellwood City Forge Co. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 21-00077).

Commenting upon the results of a second remand, Chinese cabinet exporter Ancientree Cabinet Co. challenged the Commerce Department’s continued use of adverse facts available when calculating the exporter’s countervailing duty rate, imposed because Commerce claimed it couldn't verify the exporter’s participation in China’s Export Buyer’s Credit Program (Dalian Meisen Woodworking Co. v. U.S., CIT # 20-00110).

Tire exporters Guizhou Tyre Co. and Aeolus Tyre Co. asked for 6,000 more words for their opening brief after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rejected their bid to submit two separate briefs. The companies noted that they received the government's consent and there's "good cause" to expand the word count (Guizhou Tyre Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2163).

A Moroccan exporter argued the Commerce Department can't ask open-ended questions about whether governments provided it any “other” subsidies, in questionnaires sent during administrative reviews (OCP S.A. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00261).

The Court of International Trade in a Jan. 8 text-only order denied Florida man Zhe "John" Liu's motion to amend the protective order in a customs penalty case against Liu and his company GL Paper Distribution. The U.S. said the motion was another attempt to get around the limits of discovery in a separate criminal proceeding against Liu (United States v. Zhe "John" Liu, CIT # 22-00215).

The U.S. and importer SGS Sports submitted a stipulation of facts and joint motion for the entry of a judgment in a customs case on the classification of reimported swimsuits, avoiding a bench trial over whether the swimsuits qualify for Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 9801.00.20 as U.S. goods returned (SGS Sports v. United States, CIT # 18-00128).

Parties in a case on the 2020 countervailing duty review on steel concrete reinforcing bar from Turkey disagreed on the impact of the Court of International Trade's ruling in a separate suit concerning the 2018 review of the same CVD order. Filing a joint status report to the trade court on Jan. 8, the U.S. and exporter Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret said no consensus has been reached and "none of the parties have changed their position," though Kaptan said the court's decision "dictates the outcome of this proceeding given virtually identical facts" (Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret v. United States, CIT # 22-00149).