The Court of International Trade on July 29 sustained the Commerce Department's decision on remand to slash exporter Meihua Group International Trading (Hong Kong)'s antidumping duty rate from 154.07%, based on adverse facts available, to zero percent in the 2019-20 review of the AD order on xanthan gum from China.

The Court of International Trade on July 30 sustained the Commerce Department's decision on remand to remove exporter Nagase's compensation for payment expense from the company's general and administrative expense ratio. Judge Stephen Vaden also said that Nagase failed to exhaust its administrative remedies pertaining to its challenge to Commerce's assessment rate in the first review of the antidumping duty order on glycine from Japan.

The Court of International Trade on July 26 sent back the Commerce Department's consideration of alternative time periods in using the Cohen's d test to detect "masked" dumping in the 2020-21 review of the antidumping duty order on circular welded carbon-quality steel pipe from the United Arab Emirates.

A U.S. District Court in Kentucky on July 24 said that the U.S. statute barring the smuggling of goods from the U.S. covers only material items and doesn't extend to emails. U.S. District Judge for Western Kentucky David Hale dismissed a charge against defense contractor Quadrant Magnetics, along with several of its employees, which said the parties smuggled goods from the U.S. by "emailing magnet schematics to Chinese manufacturers."

The Court of International Trade in a July 17 decision made public July 25 sent back the Commerce Department's use of exporter Prochamp's German sales as the comparison market in an antidumping duty investigation. Judge M. Miller Baker said that since the agency didn't know what percentage of the company's German sales were actually for consumption in Germany, Commerce's use of the comparison market was unsupported.

The Court of International Trade denied Seko Customs Brokerage's bids for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against its temporary suspension from the Entry Type 86 Test and Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism programs. Judge Claire Kelly found Seko already received all the relief it sought when it was conditionally reinstated into the programs and told why it was originally suspended.

Litigants sparred at a July 23 oral argument at the Court of International Trade on whether the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on steel wheels from China cover wheels shipped from Thailand with either a rim or a disc made in China. The parties disagreed on whether a prior scope ruling from the Commerce Department spoke to whether these "mixed" goods -- wheels made with either a Chinese-origin rim or disc, but not both -- are covered by the AD/CVD scope (Asia Wheel v. United States, CIT # 23-00096).

CBP refused to explain why it denied a vehicle parts importer's protest after the agency liquidated its entry at a rate 78.55 percentage points higher than it had been assigned in a past antidumping duty review, the importer said in a July 23 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Strategic Import Supply v. U.S., CIT # 24-00124).

The Court of International Trade on July 23 said CBP didn't have the authority to extend an order from the court enjoining liquidation of various entries to imports entered by Acquisition 362, doing business as Strategic Import Supply. Judge Mark Barnett dismissed the case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, finding that because Acquisition 362 wasn't a party to a separate case challenging the antidumping duty rate assessed on the company's goods, it wasn't subject to the court's order suspending liquidation of various tire entries.

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.