The Court of International Trade wouldn't be able to "effectuate its judgment" without the authority to order reliquidation past the applicable 90-day time frame, the U.S. told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a Dec. 15 reply brief. Defending the trade court's dismissal of retail giant Target's suit against a court-ordered reliquidation of Target entries that erroneously received a favorable antidumping duty rate, the U.S. distinguished the spat from Cemex v. U.S., in which the Federal Circuit barred reliquidation (Target Corp. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2274).

The Commerce Department "ignores critical facts" in its threshold for differentiating between different pasta types in an antidumping duty review, exporter La Molisana said in a Dec. 13 reply brief brief (La Molisana v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2060).

The Court of International Trade in a Dec. 14 opinion granted the government's request for a voluntary remand in a duty evasion case on hardwood plywood from China in light of two recent judicial opinions. One decision saw the Commerce Department reverse course on whether exporter Vietnam Finewood Co.'s goods are subject to the antidumping and countervailing duty orders, while the other said it was illegal for CBP not to give parties to Enforce and Protect Act actions access to business confidential information.

The president's authority to modify Section 232 tariffs doesn't allow the president to "transform" tariffs years after setting the duties "by newly restricting wholly distinct categories of derivative goods without any study and without any plausible connection to U.S. national security," exporter Oman Fasteners told the U.S. Supreme Court (Oman Fasteners v. U.S., Sup. Ct. # 23-432).

The Commerce Department didn't give antidumping duty respondent PT. Asia Pacific Fibers a "reasonable" chance to address issues found by Commerce in the company's verification responses, the Court of International Trade ruled Dec. 12. Because Commerce never issued a verification report to Asia Pacific, Judge Richard Eaton said the agency must report the "methods, procedures, and results" of verification and let the company address any issues.

The Court of International Trade on Dec. 12 granted the government's request for a remand so the Commerce Department can reconsider its use of Descartes data in calculating an ocean freight benchmark. Sending back the 2021 countervailing duty review on solar products from China, Judge Jane Restani said that on remand Commerce should consider the court's ruling in a separate case that addresses the use of Descartes data in this context, "as well the court's other rulings on the ocean freight issue."

The Court of International Trade sent back the Commerce Department's decision to disregard Indonesian crude palm oil prices when it calculated antidumping duty respondent Wilmar's normal value, which was based off an export levy set by the Indonesian government. In a Nov. 21 opinion made public Dec. 12, Judge Richard Eaton said if the agency sticks with the particular market situation adjustment in the AD investigation on Indonesian biodiesel, it must explain why doing so doesn't lead to a double remedy, since Commerce countervailed the export levy in the related countervailing duty investigation.

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.

The Court of International Trade ruled Dec. 11 that imported industrial shredders that use blades to break up material carry no duties because they are classifiable as crushing and grinding machines.

The Commerce Department illegally used just one respondent in the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on stainless steel flanges from India covering entries in 2018-19, the Court of International Trade ruled Dec. 8. Judge Timothy Stanceu said that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision in YC Rubber Co. v. U.S. "is directly on point" in this case, because Commerce only reviewed exporter Chandan Steel Limited in a situation where multiple other companies exported the subject merchandise.