The Commerce Department legally found that the Korean government didn't provide a countervailable benefit through its provision of electricity to respondents in the countervailing duty investigation on carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from South Korea, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled Oct. 23. Judges Raymond Chen, Todd Hughes and Tiffany Cunningham said Commerce sufficiently carried out a less-than-adequate-remuneration (LTAR) analysis after its original preferential rate analysis fell short before the appellate court in 2019.

The Commerce Department wasn't required to issue exporter Jin Tiong Electrical Materials Manufacturer a questionnaire for purposes of giving the company a separate antidumping duty rate, the U.S. government told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in an Oct. 20 reply brief. The government said 19 U.S.C. § 1677f-1(c)(1) -- the statute relied on by Jin Tiong to claim that Commerce can't limit the number of respondents when the number is small -- doesn't speak to a process that Commerce must follow in carrying out its separate rate examinations (Repwire v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1933).

The Court of International Trade in an Oct. 20 order granted the U.S. request for a remand in an antidumping and countervailing duty evasion case to review the implications of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's ruling in Royal Brush Manufacturing v. U.S. In that decision, the appellate court found CBP's failure to grant Enforce and Protect Act respondents access to the confidential information in the proceeding violated their due process rights (Newtrend USA Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00347).

The Commerce Department properly saddled countervailing duty respondent Qingdao Ge Rui Da Rubber Co. (GRT) with adverse facts available related to its alleged use of China's Export Buyer's Credit Program, the Court of International Trade ruled in an Oct. 20 opinion. While Commerce and the trade court have rejected the use of AFA for this program where a respondent can submit verifications that their U.S. buyers didn't use the program, Judge Mark Barnett sustained AFA here since GRT failed to raise its claims against the use of AFA administratively.

The International Trade Commission failed to give Russian exporter PAO TMK a chance to comment on issues in the International Trade Commission's negligibility analysis as part of the injury proceeding on seamless pipe from South Korea, Russia and Ukraine, the Court of International Trade ruled. In an Oct. 12 opinion made public Oct. 20, Judge M. Miller Baker said TMK should be able to submit comments on the commission's sole reliance on questionnaire data from one unnamed company, "Company A," on goods from Germany and another unnamed company, "Company B," on goods from Mexico.

The Commerce Department incorrectly found solar panels imported from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam are circumventing the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells from China, according to four separate complaints, all filed on Oct. 18 and all asking the Court of International Trade for remand.

Shipping giant Maersk Line owes insurance company Starr Indemnity & Liability Co. over $5.8 million for losing around 57 containers of consumer goods at sea while carrying them from Cambodia and China to Los Angeles, the insurance firm argued in an Oct. 19 complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Starr, the insurer for retail giant Target Corp.'s goods, said the goods were lost due to the "negligence and breach of duty" of Maersk and its employees (Starr Indemnity & Liability Co. v. M/V Maersk Eindhoven, S.D.N.Y. # 23-09177).

The Commerce Department failed to address contradicting that the U.S. industry couldn't timely provide tin mill products when it denied Seneca Foods' requests for exclusions from Section 232 steel and aluminum duties, the Court of International Trade ruled in an Oct. 18 opinion.

Chinese printer cartridge manufacturer Ninestar Corp. urged the Court of International Trade to order the U.S. to submit the full, unredacted administrative record relating to the Forced Labor Enforcement Task Force's (FLETF's) decision to add Ninestar to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List. Even though the court has entered a protective order in the case, the government redacted over 99% of its submitted record (Ninestar Corp. v. United States, CIT # 23-00182).

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.