Jacob Kopnick

Despite the Department of Justice's agreement to a limited injunction against liquidation through the end of the first administrative review of the relevant antidumping duty order, Ashley Furniture still seeks an open-ended injunction is needed to avoid irreparable harm due to a potentially years-long litigation that could run beyond the end of the first review, Ashley said in a Sept. 17 reply brief at the Court of International Trade.

The International Trade Commission ignored that the domestic tire industry was profitable when it made its determination that passenger vehicle and light truck tires from South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam were harming the domestic industry, plaintiffs led by Sentury Tire (Thailand) Co. said in a Sept. 17 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Sentury also argued that the commission failed to properly consider the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the domestic industry (Sentury Tire (Thailand) Co. Ltd., et al. v. United States, CIT #21-00439).

The Commerce Department's mandatory respondent selection process in a countervailing duty case on wood flooring resembled "Russian roulette" due to fundamental errors in the CBP data used to make the respondent picks, plaintiffs in a case at the Court of International Trade said in four briefs (Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co., Ltd., et al. v. United States, CIT Consol. #20-03885).

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

LG Electronics, and its U.S. affiliate, launched a case at the Court of International Trade against the International Trade Commission for freezing out certain members of its counsel from a safeguard extension proceeding on solar panels, in a Sept. 16 complaint. The ITC did not grant full access to proprietary information for all of LGE's legal team, from the firm Curtis Mallet-Prevost, due to the lawyers' roles in representing China in a dispute settlement case at the World Trade Organization (LG Electronics USA, Inc., et al. v. United States, CIT 21-00520).

The Commerce Department violated the law when it decided not to undertake a scope inquiry upon the request of Zhejiang Yuhua Timber Co., A-Timber Flooring Company Limited and Mullican Flooring Co., the three companies said in a Sept. 17 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Zhejiang Yuhua Timber Co. Ltd., et al. v. United States, CIT #21-00502).

The Commerce Department violated the law when it found that antidumping duty review respondent BlueScope Steel Pty did not reimburse its U.S. affiliate, BlueScope Steel Americas (BSA), for antidumping duties, U.S. Steel Corp. said in a Sept. 20 complaint at the Court of International Trade. The agency failed to consider evidence provided by U.S. Steel that detracts from the agency's conclusion and failed to provide a reasoned explanation that reimbursement was not occurring, the steel giant said (United States Steel Corporation v. United States, CIT #21-00528).

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

The Court of International Trade said the Commerce Department had sufficient evidence in its changed circumstances review that found that the situation had not changed regarding countervailable subsidies for Argentina's biodiesel industry. Judge Gary Katzmann, in a Sept. 21 opinion, also held that Commerce, which originally found changed circumstances but later switched back to a finding of no changed circumstances, acted in accordance with the law.

The Court of International Trade rejected an importer's bid for reconsideration of its challenge of the countervailing duty rate assessed on its tire imports. The court found for the second time that the importer lacked proper jurisdiction due to an untimely filed protest of a liquidation decision. “The lesson is both clear and stark: Don’t sit on your rights,” Judge Stephen Alexander Vaden said.