Plaintiff Risen Energy Co. will appeal a December 2022 Court of International Trade opinion involving the 2017-18 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on solar cells from China. Per a Feb. 21 notice, Risen will take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In the proceeding, the trade court upheld Commerce's surrogate value picks for silver paste, a solar cell input, backsheet and ethyl vinyl acetate and its decision to use partial neutral facts available instead of adverse facts available (see 2301050026) (Risen Energy Co., Ltd. v. United States, CIT # 20-03743).

A Commerce remand determination on welded carbon steel pipes and tubes should be upheld by the Court of International Trade despite a separate Commerce remand redetermination that dual-stenciled pipe and tube is not covered by an antidumping duty order on circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes, the government argued in a brief filed Feb. 17 (Saha Thai Steel Pipe Public Company, Limited v. United States, CIT # 21-00627).

The Commerce Department illegally reversed its initial decision that lemon juice exporter Louis Dreyfus Co. was not affiliated with its primary fresh lemon supplier on the grounds that the company had no close supplier relationship with the lemon grower, U.S. company Ventura Coastal argued in a Feb. 16 complaint at the Court of International Trade. In the complaint, Ventura also railed against Commerce's decision to exclude certain administrative expenses pertaining to services provided by Louis Dreyfus' parent company or affiliated holding companies from the exporter's general and administrative expense rate calculation (Ventura Coastal v. United States, CIT # 23-00009).

The Court of International Trade in a confidential Feb. 17 order partially granted the U.S. motion to dismiss an antidumping duty case brought by Cambodian mattress makers. In the order, Judge Gary Katzmann also partially granted a motion for judgment from the plaintiffs, led by Best Mattresses International Co. Katzmann gave the litigants until Feb. 23 to review the opinion for confidential information (Best Mattresses International Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. # 21-00281).

The government owes interest on refunded duty overpayments made with a prior disclosure, importer Otter argued in a Feb. 16 motion at the Court of International Trade. Government arguments that repayments of voluntary tenders are not subject to interest accruals means that penalties for prior disclosures could never be enforced if they were made before a penalty was issued, Otter said (Otter Products v. United States, CIT #22-00033).

The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

U.S. steelmakers Nucor, Steel Dynamics, SSAB Enterprises and Cleveland-Cliffs should not be allowed to intervene in a case challenging the International Trade Commission's decision not to review an antidumping injury proceeding, plaintiff Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari argued in a series of three Feb. 15 briefs at the Court of International Trade (Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari T.A.S. v. United States, CIT # 22-00349).

An Enforce and Protect Act finding of evasion against Blue Pipe Steel Center should not be decided on by the Court of International Trade while the underlying scope issue is still on appeal, argued the government in a Feb. 15 motion at the Court of International Trade. DOJ asked the court to deny a motion for judgment from Blue Pipe, or alternatively, defer its decision until after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit resolves the scope issue (Blue Pipe Steel Center Co., Ltd. v. United States, CIT # 21-00081).

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

Antidumping and countervailing duty petitioner Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee will appeal two December Court of International Trade opinions upholding Commerce Department scope rulings. In the case, Commerce on remand found importers Worldwide Door Components' and Columbia Aluminum Products' door thresholds were not covered by the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China, finding they qualify for the finished merchandise exclusion (see 2212190051). Per a pair of Feb. 14 notices of appeal, the committee will take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Worldwide Door Components v. U.S., CIT #19-00012) (Columbia Aluminum Products v. U.S., CIT #19-00013).