Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
August 7, 2017, Decided
[*1306] O'Malley, Circuit Judge.
The Advanced Technology & Materials entity ("ATM"), comprised of Beijing Gang Yan Diamond Products Company, Gang Yan Diamond Products, Inc., and other affiliated companies, appeals from a decision of the Court of International Trade ("CIT") upholding the Department of Commerce's ("Commerce") determination in a first administrative review of an earlier-imposed anti-dumping order.1 In that review, Commerce imposed an adjusted PRC-wide entity rate of 82.12% on subject goods imported by ATM. See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coal. v. United States (CIT Decision), 2015 Ct. Int'l Trade LEXIS 107, SLIP OP. 2015-105, SLIP OP. 15-105 (Ct. Int'l Trade Sept. 23, 2015). Because the CIT did not err in upholding Commerce's decision, we affirm.
A. Basis for Investigations and Administrative Reviews
Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1673, Commerce imposes an antidumping duty on foreign merchandise if: (1) it determines that the merchandise "is being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than its fair value," and (2) the International Trade [**3] Commission ("ITC") determines that the sale of the merchandise at less than fair value materially injures, threatens, or impedes the establishment of an industry in the United States. If an interested party files a petition with Commerce on behalf of an industry alleging that foreign merchandise warrants the imposition of an antidumping duty under § 1673, Commerce initiates an antidumping [*1307] duty investigation. 19 U.S.C. § 1673a. As part of this investigation, Commerce calculates a "normal value" for the subject merchandise—the price at which the "foreign like product" is sold in the exporting country or in a representative country if, inter alia, the exporting country has a market situation that does not permit a proper comparison—so that it can compare the export price of the foreign merchandise with the normal value. Id. § 1677b.
If Commerce and the ITC conclude that the imports or sales of the subject merchandise are governed by § 1673, Commerce issues an antidumping duty order. Id. § 1673d(c)(2). The amount of the antidumping duty is "the amount by which the normal value exceeds the export price (or the constructed export price) for the merchandise." Id. § 1673. If requested, Commerce conducts a yearly administrative review of the antidumping [**4] duty order and calculates a new antidumping duty rate. Id. § 1675(a)(1)-(2).
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
866 F.3d 1304 *; 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 14483 **; 39 Int'l Trade Rep. (BNA) 1001; 2017 WL 3366808
DIAMOND SAWBLADES MANUFACTURERS COALITION, Plaintiff-Appellee v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee v. BEIJING GANG YAN DIAMOND PRODUCTS COMPANY, GANG YAN DIAMOND PRODUCTS, INC., Defendants-Appellants CLIFF INTERNATIONAL, LTD., Defendant
Subsequent History: As Corrected February 8, 2018.
Prior History: [**1] Appeal from the United States Court of International Trade in No. 1:13-cv-00078-RKM, Senior Judge R. Kenton Musgrave.
Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. United States, 2015 Ct. Intl. Trade LEXIS 107, SLIP OP. 15-105, SLIP OP. 2015-105 (Ct. Int'l Trade, Sept. 23, 2015)
entity, administrative review, cooperated, calculated, exporters, government control, antidumping, proceedings, rebut a presumption, producers, Diamond, rates, country-wide, merchandise, Sawblades, qualify, fail to cooperate, substantial evidence, statutory framework, state control, assigns, fair value, margin
Civil Procedure, Appeals, Standards of Review, Substantial Evidence, International Trade Law, Antidumping, Trade Agreements Act, Investigations & Proceedings, Judicial Review, Evidence, Inferences & Presumptions, Inferences, Burdens of Proof, Allocation, Presumptions, Rebuttal of Presumptions, Particular Presumptions