Requiring all actions needed to implement a trade agreement to be specifically delegated by Congress to federal agencies would interfere with Fast Track Authority by effectively negating assurances to negotiating partners that Congress will implement the provisions as agreed to by the United States during the negotiation of the trade agreement, plaintiff-appellants, including the Canadian government, argued in a Feb. 22 reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Committee Overseeing Action for Lumber Internaitonal Trade Investigatoins or Negotiations v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-1021).

Exporter Evraz Inc. moved to dismiss its own antidumping duty case at the Court of International Trade in a Feb. 22 notice of dismissal. The case concerns the Commerce Department's final results in the 2020-21 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on large diameter welded pipe from Canada. Evraz moved to dismiss the case under CIT's rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), which says that the plaintiff can dismiss an action without a court order by filing a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment (Evraz Inc. v. United States, CIT #23-00012).

U.S. Steel Corp. filed a second bid to intervene in a Court of International Trade case over an International Trade Commission injury proceeding, arguing that it meets the standard for permissive intervention since the outcome of the case could "jeopardize the antidumping order that U.S. Steel petitioned for and now benefits from." U.S. Steel also said that "it makes logical sense to allow" its intervention since its arguments will center on whether the court has the jurisdiction to hear plaintiff Eregli Demir ve Celik's claims, and the jurisdictional issue will "impact the companion cases where U.S. Steel has a statutory right to intervene" (Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari v. International Trade Commission, CIT # 22-00349).

CBP should remand and terminate an Enforce and Protect Act investigation that found CEK Group evaded an antidumping duty order because the underlying allegation was insufficient, not containing information required to find a reasonable suspicion of evasion of an antidumping duty order, CEK argued in a Feb. 15 reply brief at the Court of International Trade (CEK Group LLC v. United States, CIT # 22-00082).

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

The Commerce Department arbitrarily and capriciously applied partial adverse facts available when calculating a final antidumping duty on tapered roller bearings, even though the missing information was irrelevant and could not be obtained from unrelated third parties, manufacturer Tainai said in a Feb. 21 complaint to the Court of International Trade (Shanghai Tainai Bearing v. U.S., CIT # 23-00020).

Defendant-intervenor Endura Products dropped out of an Enforce and Protect Act case at the Court of International Trade after its bid for a stay in the action pending the resolution of a scope proceeding also at the trade court was denied (see 2302060069). Submitting a motion to withdraw Feb. 21, Endura said it "no longer has an interest in the current appeal" (Columbia Aluminum Products v. United States, CIT # 19-00185).

The Commerce Department "explicitly mischaracterized record evidence" when it said countervailing duty respondent Qingdao Ge Rui Da Rubber Co.'s (GRT's) only U.S. customer didn't certify that it had not used China's Export Buyer's Credit Program, the respondent argued in a Feb. 17 motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade. Commerce also failed to properly use adverse facts available over the EBCP, since the agency is required to find whether any information on the record could fill the gap that renders AFA unnecessary, but did not, the motion said (Qingdao Ge Rui Da Rubber Co., Ltd., v. United States, CIT # 22-00229).

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

Alternative characteristics used by the Commerce Department that were supplied by antidumping duty respondent LG Chem to set control numbers (CONNUMs) in an AD investigation had no relationship to actual prices and costs, and are distortive and create the potential for manipulation, AD petitioner The Ad Hoc Coalition of American SAP Producers said in a Feb. 17 complaint at the Court of International Trade (The Ad Hoc Coalition of American SAP Producers v. U.S., CIT # 23-00010).