A host of mattress companies in two Court of International Trade cases cited an Oct. 4 order from Judge Timothy Stanceu in their bid for an open-ended preliminary injunction against the antidumping duty order on mattresses from Vietnam. The order said that the open-ended injunction was warranted since the plaintiff in that case showed a likelihood of irreparable harm if the injunction was not issued in that way (see 2108230059). The U.S. had opposed the open-ended injunction, instead pushing for the injunction to merely run until the end of the first administrative review. The U.S. echoed this opposition in the two cases over the AD mattress order, arguing that if needed the injunction could be extended beyond the end of the first administrative review.

The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's finding that Al Ghurair Iron & Steel (AGIS) circumvented the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on corrosion-resistant steel products (CORE) from China via the United Arab Emirates, in a Sept. 24 ruling made public on Oct. 4.

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

Moroccan exporter OCP S.A. was granted an indefinite injunction against the liquidation of its phosphate fertilizers, in an Oct. 4 order from the Court of International Trade. After scrapping with the Department of Justice over the end date of the injunction, OCP eventually won out after proving that it was likely to suffer irreparable harm stemming from the automatic liquidation of the entries that could occur starting at the top of next year.

The Court of International Trade sustained the International Trade Commission's finding that imports of fabricated structural steel (FSS) from Canada, Chile and Mexico did not harm the domestic industry, in a Sept. 22 opinion made public on Oct. 5.

Shine Shipping and Shine International (Shine), companies that arrange for the shipment of goods with vessel operating carriers, were found not to be directly liable for the shipment of counterfeit Nike footwear by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, in a Sept. 30 opinion (Nike, Inc. v. B&H Customs Services, Inc., et al., S.D.N.Y. #20-01214).

The Court of International Trade should again reject the Commerce Department's determination on remand that the physical characteristics of outlets don't differ from butt-weld pipe fittings for antidumping duty scope purposes, Vandewater International said in Sept. 24 comments at the Court of International Trade (Vandewater International Inc., et al. v. United States, CIT #18-00199).

The Commerce Department properly hit antidumping respondent Hyundai Electric & Energy Systems Co. with adverse facts available for its failure to produce information on its cost shifting practice, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said in an Oct. 4 opinion. Upholding a decision of the Court of International Trade, a three-judge panel at the appellate court agreed that Commerce's decision to cancel verification of Hyundai's information was properly supported.

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

The Commerce Department has not shown good cause to delay filing its remand results in an antidumping case by 21 days, Turkish steel exporter and plaintiff Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret argued in an Oct. 1 brief at the Court of International Trade. While sympathetic to the agency's rationale of a large case load necessitating the extra time, the excuse falls flat since these conditions are not unusual or extraordinary circumstances, Borusan argued. Commerce also failed to show that these issues were unanticipated, the brief said (Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S., et al. v. United States, CIT Consol. #19-00056).