On November 24, 2014, The Court of International Trade (CIT) issued an order remanding a scope proceeding to the Department of Commerce (Commerce) to address several arguments made by the plaintiff, Plasticoid Manufacturing Inc. Plasticoid’s primary argument was that their product, aluminum straight edges used for cutting and marking, should be excluded from the Chinese Aluminum Extrusions Antidumping Order under the “finished merchandise” exception because the product enters the United States in its final form. In a previous Plasticoid Scope Ruling, Commerce ruled that the merchandise fell within the scope of the order because the straight edges are “mere aluminum extrusions that meet the physical description of subject merchandise, referred to by their end use.”
However, the Court found Commerce’s reliance on the “end use” language to be “misplaced.” Thus, on remand, Commerce must advise whether the straight edges would be considered “finished merchandise containing aluminum extrusions as parts that are fully and permanently assembled at the time of entry” and therefore would be excluded from the scope of the order. The Court was also critical of Commerce’s reliance on the Precision Machine Parts Scope ruling and ordered Commerce to address “point-by-point Plasticoid’s arguments that the straight edges constitute finished merchandise within the meaning of the Orders but also within the intent of Petitioner as expressed in the Precision Machine Parts scope proceeding. In that scope proceeding, the petitioner differentiated “downstream products that have undergone subsequent processes (intended to be in-scope) from “downstream products that have been converted to finished merchandise (which are intended to be excluded).” Furthermore, Commerce was ordered to “articulate for the record a clear and coherent rationale for a…sound interpretation of the relevant scope language.”
If you have questions about antidumping orders or scope determinations, please contact Frohsin & Barger.