United States Court of International Trade

The court partially granted the government’s motion to dismiss, holding that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over 30 protests still pending when the action commenced and two protests omitted from the summons. The action may proceed only as to the six protests for which the summons listed denial dates.

The court sustained Commerce’s remand redetermination on both the entered-value adjustment and the land-price benchmark. It concluded that Commerce adequately explained why it denied the adjustment when the company’s invoices could not be verified against customs records, and reasonably explained its use of two…

The court denied GameChange’s motion for judgment on the agency record and entered judgment for the United States, upholding Commerce’s determination that the charging module fell within the antidumping and countervailing duty orders.

The court sustained Commerce’s plywood benchmark calculation because Commerce reasonably considered product comparability, including species and grade, and explained why it averaged the available datasets.

The court again remanded Commerce’s antidumping and countervailing duty redeterminations because Commerce did not adequately explain why freight rail couplers attached to railcars in Mexico should remain within the investigations’ scope.

The court granted Freestyle World’s motion to certify a mandatory Rule 23(b)(2) class of importers who paid the challenged IEEPA duties and appointed class counsel. It held that the motion was timely, that the Rule 23(a) requirements were met, and that a single injunction directing liquidation or reliquidation would…

The court remanded Commerce’s determination that Chinese-origin running-gear and landing-gear subassemblies incorporated into Vietnamese chassis remained within the scope of the orders.

The court denied the government’s request to extend the time for Commerce to investigate two companies and calculate individual antidumping rates. Because Commerce had already determined that the companies should be excluded from the order and receive zero rates, and that determination was sustained and affirmed on an…

The Court affirmed the Department of Commerce’s final scope ruling, holding that its interpretation of the finished‑heat‑sink exclusion and its evaluation of IPG Photonics’ evidence are supported by substantial evidence and comply with the law, and therefore denied IPG’s motion for judgment on the agency record.

The Court sustained the Department of Commerce’s final redetermination results for both the countervailing‑duty and antidumping‑duty reviews, rejecting the plaintiffs’ arguments on waiver, reliquidation, and the separate‑rate determinations.

The United States Court of International Trade affirmed the Department of Commerce’s antidumping duty determinations for mobile access equipment imported from China, holding that the agency’s selection of Turkey as the primary surrogate country, its use of Turkish and Bulgarian HTS codes, and its deduction of Section…

The court held that plaintiffs could raise their pure question of regulatory interpretation despite not presenting it to Commerce, and that Commerce could not rescind their reviews solely because their entries lacked suspended status when the regulation referred to entries of subject merchandise.

The court sustained Commerce’s antidumping-duty determination in both consolidated actions, concluding that its surrogate-country and input-valuation choices were supported by substantial evidence and otherwise lawful. It also held that Commerce properly deducted Section 301 duties from Dingli’s U.S.

The court sustained Commerce’s antidumping-duty determination in both actions, rejecting Dingli’s challenges to the surrogate-country selection, calculation methodology, and deduction of Section 301 duties, as well as the Coalition’s challenges to Commerce’s input valuations.

The court denied IPG’s motion for judgment on the agency record and sustained Commerce’s determination that IPG’s heat sinks fall within the aluminum-extrusions orders. It held that the finished-heat-sink exclusion requires evidence of thermal performance requirements established before or during development and…

The court granted the Government’s motion for default judgment as a discovery sanction, holding that Koehler’s complete and willful refusal to answer interrogatories permitted judgment under Rule 37 without a prior entry of default under Rule 55.

The court denied Xu’s motion for a preliminary injunction seeking to prevent Customs from disabling his entry filer code. It concluded that Xu had not shown a fair chance of success on his due-process claim, likely irreparable harm, or that the combined balance-of-hardships and public-interest factors favored relief.

The court sustained Commerce’s fourth remand redetermination in the antidumping investigation of welded line pipe from Korea. It concluded that Commerce reasonably used a two-percent price-difference threshold, could reconsider and discontinue its mixed methodology on remand, and reasonably used the ratio test to…

The court sustained Commerce’s rulings on SeAH’s rejected case-brief materials, differential pricing analysis, credit-expense calculation, and separate pipe-grade codes. It remanded Commerce’s treatment of certain HYSCO local sales because Commerce did not address record evidence bearing on whether HYSCO knew or…

The court sustained Commerce’s second remand redetermination, concluding that Commerce reasonably explained why HYSCO’s remaining home-market sales were sufficient to calculate normal value and complied with the court’s remand order. No party filed comments challenging the redetermination.

The court sustained Commerce’s second remand redetermination finding that HYSCO’s remaining home-market sales were viable for calculating normal value. Commerce reasonably explained that the remaining above-cost sales allowed comparison with all of HYSCO’s U.S.

The court remanded Commerce’s denial of Ditar’s requested level-of-trade adjustment for reconsideration. It sustained the agency’s finding that the sales did not occur at different marketing stages and upheld several of its findings about selling activities, but required Commerce to reconsider evidence about indirect…

The court sustained the Commission’s remand determinations, concluding that the Commission reasonably maintained its original votes and adequately explained why Amsted should remain in the domestic industry.

The court sustained Commerce’s second remand redetermination, including its revised three-step differential pricing analysis and its use of a new 2% price-difference threshold. It held that reasonableness is the applicable standard for reviewing Commerce’s selection of statistical tests and cutoffs, and concluded that…

The court sustained Commerce’s use of total adverse facts available against Kumar, concluding that Kumar left necessary affiliation information unresolved despite repeated requests and opportunities to explain deficiencies.

The court sustained the Commission’s remand determinations, concluding that Amsted should remain in the domestic industry and that subject imports materially injured that industry.

The court sustained Commerce’s second remand redetermination, concluding that its revised differential-pricing analysis was reasonable and consistent with the governing statute and remand mandate.

The court remanded Commerce’s determination that TFL’s further-processed products were within the antidumping order’s scope because Commerce’s plain-language reading did not support that conclusion and its analysis did not adequately address the relevant interpretive sources and record evidence.

The court denied plaintiffs’ motion to reverse the liquidation of thirteen entries and suspend their liquidation while the case proceeds. Because the entries were liquidated before plaintiffs requested the statutory injunction, the liquidation was final and the court could not grant the requested relief.

The court sustained the Commission’s remand determinations that Amsted should remain in the domestic industry and that the domestic industry was materially injured by reason of subject imports.

The court granted Kazchrome’s motion for judgment on the agency record, holding that Commerce violated its statutory duty to provide notice of a deficiency and an opportunity to cure before applying adverse facts available.

The Court affirmed the Department of Commerce’s Remand Results, sustaining its adjustment of Dongkuk’s indirect conversion costs and its decision not to adjust Dongkuk’s direct variable overhead costs, because both were supported by substantial evidence.

The Court affirmed the International Trade Commission’s finding that subsidized shrimp imports materially injured the U.S. shrimp industry. It held that the Commission’s conclusions on underselling, market‑share loss, and causation were supported by substantial evidence and fell within the agency’s statutory…

The Court of International Trade affirmed the International Trade Commission’s finding that imports of frozen shrimp caused material injury to the U.S. shrimp industry and that the domestic like product includes both raw and cooked frozen shrimp, finding the Commission’s analysis supported by substantial evidence.

The Court of International Trade affirmed the International Trade Commission’s material‑injury determination that subsidized shrimp imports caused injury to the U.S. shrimp industry.

The United States Court of International Trade reviewed the final results of a remand redetermination in Catfish Farmers of America v. United States. The court found that the alleged error was ministerial and therefore sustained the remand redetermination.

The United States Court of International Trade remanded the Department of Commerce's final antidumping duty results for steel racks to allow reconsideration of the differential pricing methodology, granting Commerce 90 days to issue a redetermination and extending the comment period to 60 days.

The court granted the United States’ request for a voluntary remand so Commerce could reconsider its differential-pricing methodology after replacing the Cohen’s d test in the Final Results and give the parties an opportunity to comment.

The court denied the challenge to Commerce’s use of CASEAMEX’s submitted packing data, finding no showing that the decision was unsupported by substantial evidence or unlawful. It held that Commerce’s rejection of the timely ministerial-error allegation conflicted with the statute governing correction of errors in…

The court sustained the Commission’s finding that subsidized shrimp imports materially injured the domestic shrimp industry. It concluded that substantial evidence supported the Commission’s decision to include frozen cooked shrimp in the domestic like product and that the statute did not require the Commission to…