The Court of International Trade on March 26 denied importer Eteros Technologies an expedited briefing schedule in its case alleging that CBP retaliated against the company's executives after the importer received a favorable ruling at the trade court. Judge Gary Katzmann said Eteros hasn't shown that "good cause" warrants a speedy resolution of the case. The judge held that the harms suffered by the plaintiffs as a result of CBP's actions "are not time-sensitive harms that will become irremediable in the near future," that the harms suffered are not "extraordinary" and that it's not clear that a speedy end of the case serves the public interest.

The Court of International Trade on March 25 granted three wildlife advocacy groups' voluntary dismissal of a case seeking to compel the Commerce, Treasury and Homeland Security departments to ban fish from fisheries in nine nations for failing to meet U.S. standards. The advocacy groups settled the matter with the agencies, laying out a four-phase plan that will see the National Marine Fisheries Service issue comparability findings for the fisheries (see 2501170058). Judge Gary Katzmann granted the dismissal, noting that the court retains jurisdiction to oversee compliance with the agreement.

The Court of International Trade on March 21 sustained the Commerce Department's third remand results in the 2018 review of the countervailing duty order on carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from South Korea. The agency had again refused to investigate the provision of off-peak electricity for less than adequate remuneration. Judge Mark Barnett said Commerce reasonably laid out the evidence that petitioner Nucor Corp. should have provided to "justify a new subsidy investigation of this subset of the broader electricity pricing scheme."

The Court of International Trade on March 18 held that CBP is not entitled to Customs Passenger Processing Fees paid by individual passengers who cancel their tickets and who never receive a refund or fail to use a travel credit. Judge Gary Katzmann sided with Southwest Airlines on the issue, first finding that CBP isn't entitled to the fee under the statute, 19 U.S.C. § 58c(a), where no passenger arrives in the U.S. and where the agency didn't provide any customs services. The judge also held that CBP's Guidance Letters on the topic can't usurp the statute and that Southwest doesn't hold the fees in a "constructive trust" for CBP, since the agency has "no equitable interest in a fee where no passenger travels."

The Court of International Trade on March 11 again sent back the Commerce Department's decision to include marble composite tile made by Elysium Tiles in the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on ceramic tile from China. Judge Jane Restani said "the scope language is not so clear that either party must prevail," finding both that Commerce didn't provide any (k)(1) sources to back its conclusion and that Elysium didn't sufficiently prove its composite tile is excluded from the orders as a ceramic tile.

The Court of International Trade affirmed March 10 the Commerce Department’s decision to use India as a surrogate over Indonesia in an antidumping review of frozen fish fillets from Vietnam. It said the department acted reasonably in finding that the Indian data was overall better. Regarding labor costs, it “had to choose between two regulatory preferences,” one for using only one surrogate and one for contemporaneous information, and it was Commerce’s “prerogative” to choose the latter, the court said.

The Court of International Trade on March 7 remanded in part and sustained in part the Commerce Department's 2020-22 review of the antidumping duty order on mattresses from Indonesia. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said Commerce properly excluded various mattress models made by respondent PT Ecos Jaya Indonesia under the "multifunctional furniture" and "mattress topper" exclusions. However, the judge said substantial evidence didn't support the exclusion of five models of the respondent's products under the mattress topper exclusion, since there was no indication they were used on top of mattresses. Choe-Groves also agreed to the government's request for a voluntary remand to reconsider the calculation of constructed value profit, selling expenses and constructed export price ratios.

Court of International Trade Judge M. Miller Baker affirmed March 7 the Commerce Department’s decision on remand not to grant respondent Gujarat Fluorochemicals a constructed export price offset as part of an antidumping duty investigation into granular polytetrafluorethylene resin from India. The offset was originally intended to make up for the lack of data Commerce needed to adjust Gujarat’s home-market price for different levels of trade. Baker also affirmed Commerce’s choice to rely on Gujarat’s allocated movement expenses, agreeing it wasn’t feasible for the exporter to provide transaction-specific expenses.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled March 6 that an importer’s steel branch outlets are covered by antidumping duties on butt-weld pipe fittings from China. Judge Timothy Dyk dissented. The case considered whether the Commerce Department had properly determined that the term “butt-weld” was ambiguous (Vandewater International v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1093).

The Court of International Trade on Feb. 28 sustained the Commerce Department's 2019-20 review of the antidumping duty order on steel concrete rebar from Mexico. Judge Stephen Vaden said Commerce complied with his previous remand order telling the agency to reopen the record and accept a submission from respondent Grupo Simec that it previously rejected for being untimely. On remand, Commerce dropped Grupo Simec's AD rate from 66.7% to zero percent and the rate for the non-individually examined companies from 33.35% to zero percent.