The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on June 2 upheld a Court of International Trade ruling that S.C. Johnson's Ziploc brand reclosable sandwich bags are classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 3923 as articles for the conveyance or packing of other goods, dutiable at 3%, and not in heading 3924 as plastic household goods, which are eligible for duty-free GSP treatment. Since the bags could fall under either heading 3923 or 3924, heading 3923 is the correct home for the bags since its terms are "more difficult to satisfy and describe the article with a greater degree of accuracy and certainty," the Federal Circuit said in upholding CIT's decision.

The Court of International Trade remanded in part and sustained in part the Commerce Department's final results in a countervailing duty investigation on truck and bus tires from China in a May 19 opinion made public on May 26. Upholding Commerce's issuance of the CVD order and the agency's application of adverse facts available to previously unreported grants and loans by respondent Giuzhou Tyre Co., Judge Timothy Reif also sent back for further consideration Commerce's decision to apply AFA to China's Export Buyer's Credit Program, along with four other elements to its duty calculation.

The Court of International Trade upheld the Commerce Department's remand results reversing a scope ruling that included ready to assemble kitchen cabinets under the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on hardwood plywood products from China, in a May 27 opinion. Judge Gary Katzmann had originally remanded on the question of whether the scope request from petitioners in the case was specific enough to be accepted, and upon further examination Commerce found that it was not. None of the litigants challenged the remand redetermination.

A set of domestic steel producers will not be allowed to intervene in six challenges to the Commerce Department's denials of Section 232 tariff exclusions to steel importers, following a May 25 decision from the Court of International Trade. "The Court concludes that the proposed intervenors are ineligible to intervene as a matter of law and therefore denies their motions," said Judge Miller Baker in the decision. "Nevertheless, the Court reiterates its willingness to entertain motions to appear as amici curiae."

The Court of International Trade upheld the Commerce Department's second remand results which, under court order, added the full amount of duty drawback adjustment to two companies' export prices and nixed two circumstances of sale adjustments in an antidumping case on Turkish steel.

The Court of International Trade on May 18 sustained a scope revision in antidumping and countervailing duty investigation on steel trailer wheels from China, backing the Commerce Department's addition to the scope in its final determinations of language covering Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD) chrome-covered wheels. In a pair of opinions, Judge Gary Katzmann said Commerce had authority to determine the scope of its investigations, and found that the agency "provided adequate explanation" for its decision to include PVD chrome wheels. However, Katzmann did remand the cases due to Commerce's retroactive imposition of antidumping and countervailing duties, instructing the agency to assess the duties from the final scope memo that made the scope changes, and not the date of the preliminary determination.

The Court of International Trade ruled that a shipment of 443 bales of secondhand clothing imported by DIS Vintage should be classified as "commingled goods" and subject to the "highest rate of duty for any part thereof," siding with the government in a May 17 opinion. Judge Timothy Reif, after examining samples of the goods, determined that some were not classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 6309 as "worn clothing and other worn articles" since they had no visible signs of appreciable wear. Instead, some were classified as cotton trousers of subheading 6203.42.40, dutiable at 16.6%, which as the highest rate of duty for the 443 bales applies to the entire shipment of commingled goods under General Note 3(f)(i).

The Court of International Trade remanded for a second time an antidumping case on certain off-the-road tires from China, ruling that the Commerce Department failed to provide enough evidence that two respondents were under de facto government control and not warranting of an individual AD rate. Commerce had found in an administrative review that the Chinese government controlled export functions for exporters Aeolus Tyre and Guizhou Tyre Co., assigning them a 105.31% rate as part of the China-wide entity.

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on May 14 upheld the Court of International Trade's decision to reject the Commerce Department's duty drawback adjustment methodology for an Indian exporter in an antidumping duty investigation on corrosion-resistant steel products. Rather than follow its normal method of adjusting only the export price for drawback received by the exporter, Commerce in the investigation adjusted the exporter's overall costs of production, including for home market goods, resulting in a higher AD duty rate. Like CIT, the Federal Circuit held the broader allocation ran afoul of the relevant statute, which only requires an adjustment to export price.

The Court of International Trade sustained remand results in an antidumping investigation over whether a sale of steel flanges from an Indian exporter should be excluded from the home market sales database when determining the antidumping duty margin.