CBP can't extend liquidation without giving a reason, a solar panel company argued at the Court of International Trade Dec. 14 (Greentech Energy Solutions v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 23-00118.)
An importer seeking to compel the government to provide addresses of former CBP employees and underacted versions of documents handed over during discovery didn't show the sufficient need for, or relevance of, either, DOJ said Dec. 20 (Lutron Electronics v. U.S., CIT # 22-00264).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a Dec. 18 text-only order granted the government's request for 60 more days to file their opening brief in a case on whether the statute of limitations had passed on an action seeking to collect on a customs bond from surety firm American Home Assurance Co. (United States v. American Home Assurance Co., Fed. Cir. # 24-1069).
The Commerce Department made no changes to the final results of its countervailing duty administrative review on exporters of South Korean carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate, after a second remand in a case challenging the results of the 2018 review (Nucor Corporation v. U.S., CIT # 21-00182).
Exporter Kumar Industries will appeal a November Court of International Trade decision sustaining the Commerce Department's assignment of a 13.61% adverse facts available dumping rate to the exporter based on its "inadequate explanations" regarding one of its partners ownership interests in two unnamed companies (see 2311270005). In the decision, the court sustained the rate, issued as part of the first antidumping duty review on glycine from India, finding that Kumar prevented Commerce from conducting a proper affiliate analysis (Kumar Industries v. United States, CIT # 21-00622).
A paint sprayer company argued that the parts of its spray nozzles that control the flow of liquid paint are heat sinks, and are excluded from an antidumping duty order on aluminum extrusions from China (Wagner Spray Tech Corp. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00241).
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 19 upheld the Commerce Department's decision to revert to the calculation of a previously used land benchmark as part of a countervailing duty review. Judge Jane Restani said that since no parties contest the move, the court will sustain the agency's third remand results.
The U.S. defended its use of profit before tax in its calculation of a Russian phosphate fertilizer export company’s less-than-adequate-remuneration government subsidy, saying it was the most accurate method of calculation. It also said the Commerce Department’s countervailing duty on the exports fulfilled all the requirements of the Court of International Trade upon its second remand (The Mosaic Company v. United States, CIT Consol. # 21-00117).
Greek exporter Corinth Pipeworks Pipe Industry had "multiple opportunities" to submit the proper reconciliation information in an antidumping duty review "but refused to do so," justifying the Commerce Department's decision to impose adverse facts available, the U.S. government told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit last week (Corinth Pipeworks Pipe Industry v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2094).
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 18 upheld the Commerce Department's use of a 0.8 threshold for Cohen's d test to analyze masked dumping, finding Commerce's explanation for the methodology reasonable.