Court of International Trade

The Court of International Trade affirmed the International Trade Administration's decision to treat three Chinese companies as a single entity and apply adverse facts available (AFA) to that entity in the antidumping investigation of aluminum extrusions from China (A-570-967). CIT said the ITA was correct to treat the Guang Ya group, New Zhongya, and Xinya as a single entity because of common ownership by single family, among other things. In response to the companies’ challenge of application of AFA to all three companies, CIT said it is common practice to apply AFA to all members of an entity if one fails to cooperate. The combined entity of the three companies was assigned an AD rate of 33.28 percent in the investigation.

The Court of International Trade dismissed Celta Agencies’ challenge of liquidation instructions for its entries subject to the antidumping order on steel concrete reinforcing bars from Latvia (A-449-804). Celta said its entries of reinforcing bars should have been liquidated at the company-specific rate of the producer instead of the all others rate. CIT, however, said it had no subject matter jurisdiction under the 28 USC 1581(a) customs protest denial challenge provision, because Celta was in fact challenging International Trade Administration liquidation instructions, not an action by Customs. CIT said the challenge was correctly filed under the 28 USC 1581(i) residual jurisdiction provision, but the statute of limitations for its use, two years, had already expired.

The Court of International Trade proposed changes to the CIT rules, as recommended by CIT’s Advisory Committee on Rules. The changes pertain to Rules 3, 5, 56, 56.2, 65, 73.2, 75, and 81; Forms 5, 11, 14 (new) and 18A (new); Specific Instructions for Forms 11, 14 (new) and 18A (new); Administrative Order 02-01; the Appendix on Access to Business Proprietary Information Pursuant to Rule 73.2(c); and the Standard Chambers Procedures, including new Forms SCP 1, SCP 2, SCP 3 and SCP 4. Comments are due by Nov. 2.

The U.S. government appealed the Court of International Trade’s ruling in Atar, S.r.L. v. United States. On July 31, CIT finally affirmed, on the International Trade Administration’s third try, the ITA’s use of constructed value in calculating antidumping duties for the 2004-05 administrative review of pasta from Italy. Atar's’AD rate fell from 18.18 percent to 11.76 percent as a result. Email documents@brokerpower.com for a copy of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketing notice.

The Court of International Trade denied without prejudice the government’s motion to amend its complaint in United States v. Active Frontier International because the government didn’t include the actual amended complaint in its motion. CIT had given the government a second chance in its Aug. 30 AFI ruling, where CBP attempted to recover penalties from AFI because of false country of origin markings. CIT said CBP didn’t demonstrate that the false statements were “material” for penalty purposes and denied the government’s penalty claim, but allowed CBP to amend its complaint to demonstrate materiality.

Challenges of CBP exclusions of imported merchandise should be heard by U.S. district courts, rather than the Court of International Trade, if the excluded merchandise is seized before the court challenge is filed, said CIT in dismissing PRP Trading’s objection to CBP’s exclusion of its merchandise. CBP originally excluded the merchandise because it suspected false country of origin markings. PRP Trading argued it could challenge the exclusion at CIT, but CIT said it had no jurisdiction because the merchandise was seized by CBP before PRP Trading filed suit, which means the correct forum for the case is a U.S. district court.

Nucor Corporation appealed a Court of International Trade ruling affirming the International Trade Administration’s final negative determinations in three sunset reviews of antidumping and countervailing duty orders on hot-rolled flat-rolled carbon-quality steel products from Brazil and Japan. The determinations resulted in revocation of the antidumping and countervailing duty suspension agreements for Brazil (A-351-828 / C-351-829) and the AD order for Japan (A-588-846). Nucor was plaintiff-intervenor in the case.

The Court of International Trade remanded an International Trade Administration determination that a model of telescoping utility cart exported by plaintiff Welcom Products falls within the scope of the antidumping duty order on hand trucks from China (A-570-891). The ITA didn’t adequately explain its reasoning for ruling that the model at issue is within scope, in light of a 2008 scope determination that a similar model is not, CIT said. CIT also sustained two ITA determinations that other models of utility carts exported by Welcom are not in scope, despite a challenge from defendant-intervenors Gleason.

The Court of International Trade affirmed CBP’s customs classification of “Stampin’ Up!” decorative punches, imported by plaintiff Wilton Industries from Taiwan. Wilton wanted the punches classified as cutting machines under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 8441.10.00, which enter duty free, but CIT said CBP was correct in classifying them as “other perforating punches and similar handtools” under subheading 8203.40.60, dutiable at 3.3 percent. Although Wilton and CBP stipulated that 23 of the models of punches were classified as cutting machines, leaving only 16 of the models in contention, CIT said it had to look at all of the subject merchandise and applied its ruling to all 39 models.

The U.S. government appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit a ruling that affirmed its inclusion of nails in kits within the antidumping duty order on steel nails from China (A-570-909). The International Trade Administration’s original determination that Target Corporation’s nails in home tool kits were not subject to the order was remanded twice by the Court of International Trade, which found that the ITA applied contradictory approaches in scope determinations for items included in kits. The ITA finally reversed its determination and included the nails in scope, and CIT affirmed in July.