The Court of International Trade in a Nov. 17 opinion remanded parts of the Commerce Department's 2017 review of the countervailing duty order on solar cells from China. Judge Jane Restani again sent back Commerce's use of adverse facts available against respondent Risen Energy for its supposed use of China's Export Buyer's Credit Program, saying the agency imposed an "onerous level of certification" on Risen because the requirements "impede good faith efforts by respondents to comply." In addition, Restani sent back Commerce's land benchmark formula, which the agency came up with on remand, for violating the remand order's scope.

The Court of International Trade in a Nov. 17 opinion sustained the International Trade Commission's final affirmative critical circumstances determination on raw honey from Vietnam, which led to the retroactive imposition of duties due to the timing and volume of imports. Judge Leo Gordon said "the four corners of the record do not support" the legal or evidentiary claims from importers, led by Sweet Harvest Foods. The judge said the plaintiffs failed to convince the court that the phrase "order to be issued" in the statutory mandate means ITC must find that imports are "likely to undermine seriously the remedial effect of the antidumping order to be issued." The importers also failed to convince the judge "how or why the statute would limit the time period" for the analysis to only the 90-day retroactive period instead of having it mirror the same period Commerce Department reviewed in its analysis.

The Court of International Trade in a Nov. 15 opinion partially ended an antidumping case for one of two plaintiffs, German exporter Salzgitter Mannesmann Grobblech, saying the court already had resolved its claims. Salzgitter challenged the use of adverse facts available on sales for which the company could not identify or report the manufacturer in the AD investigation of cut-to-length carbon and alloy steel plate from Germany. Judge Leo Gordon earlier sustained Commerce's use of AFA but now entered partial judgment against Salzgitter after finding the remaining issues do not affect the company, giving it a chance to appeal before final resolution of the case.

The Court of International Trade in a Nov. 14 opinion again remanded the Commerce Department's de jure specificity finding regarding Germany's KAV program as part of the countervailing duty investigation of forged steel fluid end blocks from Germany. Judge Claire Kelly said that Commerce, in its second remand results, did not explain how the German subsidy program limits usage to certain industries or enterprises and failed to consider the program's economic and horizontal properties and application. The program is available in Germany to certain customers based on energy usage. Kelly ruled that the fact that the program is limited does not mean that it is de jure specific.

The Court of International Trade in a Nov. 13 opinion sustained parts and sent back parts of the 2019-20 review of the antidumping duty order on circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Thailand. Judge Stephen Vaden sent back the Commerce Department's affiliation analysis regarding mandatory respondent Saha Thai Steel Pipe Public Co. and its customer BNK Steel Co., telling the agency to "apply the proper statutory test for affiliation, and explain" how the facts back its decision. The judge, however, sustained Commerce's affiliation analysis of Saha Thai and six of its other customers. The decision also granted Commerce's request to reconsider the scope of the review following an impending Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision in a separate case brought by Saha Thai.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Nov. 13 said then-President Donald Trump legally revoked a Section 201 safeguard tariff exclusion on bifacial solar panels, in a decision that gives the president wide discretion in taking tariff action. Reversing the Court of International Trade's decision, Judges Alan Lourie, Richard Taranto and Leonard Stark said the president did not clearly misconstrue the statute to find that he could make a trade-restricting modification to past Section 201 tariff action.

The Commerce Department legally found that importer Valeo North America's T-series aluminum sheet is covered by the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on common alloy aluminum sheet from China, the Court of International Trade ruled in a Nov. 8 opinion. The case was remanded so that Commerce could address evidence that Valeo's product undergoes heat treatment, barring it from being classified as subject 3XXX-series core. Judge Mark Barnett said that Valeo did not present a "cogent challenge" to Commerce's finding that Valeo's T-series sheet "undergoes a combination of annealing and cold-working" that doesn't bar classification as a 3XXX-series alloy.

The Court of International Trade in an Oct. 30 opinion sustained the Commerce Department's remand results in a case on the 2017-18 antidumping review of multilayered wood flooring from China. Judge Richard Eaton said Commerce properly calculated the surrogate manufacturing overhead ratio by using the indirect production expenses amount in the numerator and listing its reasons for taking out energy costs and putting them in the denominator. The judge also upheld the use of Romania's International Labor Organization data to calculate the surrogate's hourly labor value, saying "the data reflects hours actually worked in the surrogate country."

The Court of International Trade in an Oct. 23 opinion rejected importer PrimeSource Building Products' request for a stay pending its U.S. Supreme Court appeal of a decision allowing the expansion of Section 232 steel and aluminum duties onto "derivative" products. Judges Jennifer Choe-Groves, M. Miller Baker and Timothy Stanceu refused to overturn a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision rejecting a stay request. Baker, penning a concurring opinion, said the court lacks authority to stay the Federal Circuit's judgment, but even if it did, the importer has not shown irreparable injury because the court has the authority to order reliquidation.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in an Oct. 23 opinion sustained the Commerce Department's decision not to countervail the South Korean government's provision of electricity as part of the countervailing duty investigation into carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from South Korea. Judges Raymond Chen, Todd Hughes and Tiffany Cunningham said that, after the appellate court's previous rejection of Commerce's preferential rate analysis, the agency appropriately used a less than adequate remuneration analysis. Commerce also sufficiently investigated the Korean Power Exchange's generation costs and found no countervailable benefit, the court said.