Mixes of frozen fruits should be classified under heading 0811 as "fruit and nuts," rather than under heading 2106 as "food preparations," the government said in a cross-motion for summary judgement filed with the Court of International Trade on May 23 (Nature's Touch Frozen Foods (West) Inc. v. United States, CIT #20-00131).

The Commerce Department's move to not fix a programming error in its antidumping margin calculation, which resulted in "irrelevant third country costs" getting assigned to sold but not produced products, was "unreasonable" and illegal, exporter Navneet Education Ltd. said in a May 23 complaint at the Court of International Trade. The result of such an error was "an overinflated and inaccurate dumping margin that did not reflect the reality of Navneet's de minimis margin that it should have received," the complaint said (Navneet Education Ltd. v. United States, CIT #22-00132).

CBP can reasonably interpret facts to establish that an importer is evading antidumping and countervailing duties in an Enforce and Protect Act investigation, and doesn't need to establish that no other conclusion could possibly be drawn from the record in an EAPA case, DOJ told the Court of International Trade in a brief filed May 20 (Leco Supply v. United States, CIT #21-00136).

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

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a mandate on May 23 in a classication case affirming a 35% duty rate for StarKist's tuna salad pouches in agreement with CBP's classification following its March 30 opinion that upheld a previous decision by the Court of International Trade (see 2203300033). StarKist challenged CBP's classification under subheading 1604.14.10, which provides for prepared or preserved fish, including tuna, whole or in pieces, "but not minced" and "in oil."

Plaintiff and exporter Prosperity Tieh Enterprise Co. opposed a group of U.S. steel producers' motion in an antidumping duty case to hold an oral argument, telling the Court of International Trade that the motion is "unnecessary and disingenuous." In the May 20 filing, Prosperity argued that since the case has been going on for six years and the main issue in the case -- the decision to collapse mandatory respondents Yieh Phui Enterprise Co. and Synn Industrial Co. with one of their affiliates, Prosperity -- has been "extensively briefed," the need for oral argument is precluded (Prosperity Tieh Enterprise Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. #16-00138).

The Court of International Trade in a confidential May 19 opinion remanded the Commerce Department's final determination in the countervailing duty investigation on carbon and alloy steel threaded rod from China in a case brought by Chinese exporter Zhejiang Junyue Standard Part Co. The exporter filed the case to contest Commerce's use of adverse facts available over its inability to verify non-use of China's Export Buyer's Credit Program. In a letter on the opinion, Judge Richard Eaton told the parties to review the opinion and tell the court by May 26 if any of the bracketed information should remain confidential or if any non-bracketed information is confidential and should be redacted for the public version (Zhejiang Junyue Standard Part Co. v. United States, CIT #20-00102).

The Court of International Trade in a May 20 order denied plaintiff Koehler Paper's stay motion in antidumping case. The U.S. opposed the stay motion which requested that the case be halted until the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sorted out what to do about the use of the Cohen's d test when detecting masked dumping on the grounds that the impact of a Federal Circuit decision is "speculative at best" (see 2204220041). The U.S. pointed out that resolution of the Federal Circuit case Stupp Corp. v. United States may only affect two legal issues in the case leaving six issues unaffected (Matra Americas LLC v. United States, CIT Consol. #21-00632).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ordered on May 20 that Turkish exporter Borusan Mannesmann's motion for summary affirmance in an antidumping case be held in abeyance. The motion asked the appellate court to affirm the Court of International Trade's ruling, which was one in a long line of rulings finding that the statute does not permit a particular market situation adjustment to the sales-below-cost test. While the U.S. failed to appear in the case, the plaintiff-appellants, led by American Cast Iron Pipe Co., said that they intend to oppose the motion (Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret v. United States, Fed. Cir. #22-1502).

A CBP stay request in a lawsuit challenging an Enforce and Protect Act evasion determination while the agency seeks a covered merchandise referral from Commerce amounts to a delay tactic to extend enforcement in a losing action, Fedmet said in a May 18 motion asking the Court of International Trade to deny the stay (Fedmet Resources Corporation v. United States, CIT #21-00248).