Honey From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony with Final Results of Administrative Review, 75393 [E8-29486]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 239 / Thursday, December 11, 2008 / Notices
751(c) of the Act and published
pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 4, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E8–29392 Filed 12–10–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(A–570–863)
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Honey From the People’s Republic of
China: Notice of Court Decision Not in
Harmony with Final Results of
Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On November 18, 2008, the
United States Court of International
Trade (‘‘CIT’’) sustained the remand
redetermination issued by the
Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) pursuant to the CIT’s
remand order in the final results of the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on honey from
the People’s Republic of China. See
Shanghai Eswell Enterprise Co., Ltd., et.
al. v. United States, Court No. 05–
00439, Slip Op. 08–124 (CIT November
18, 2008) (‘‘Eswell II’’). This case arose
from the Department’s final results for
the period of review (‘‘POR’’) December
1, 2002, through November 30, 2003.
See Honey from the People’s Republic of
China: Final Results and Final
Rescission, In Part, of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 70 FR
38873 (July 6, 2005) (‘‘Final Results’’).
Consistent with the decision of the
United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit (‘‘CAFC’’) in Timken Co.
v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (‘‘Timken’’), the Department is
notifying the public that Eswell II is not
in harmony with the Department’s Final
Results.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 11, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
Walker, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9,
Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC
20230; telephone: (202) 482–0413.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
September 13, 2007, the CIT remanded
the following issues to the Department
for further administrative proceedings
consistent with its opinion and Order:
1) the calculation of the raw honey
surrogate value; 2) the calculation of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:27 Dec 10, 2008
Jkt 217001
surrogate financial ratios with respect to
(a) the treatment of honey sales
commissions and (b) the treatment of
jars, corks, and honey machine
purchases; and 3) the use of export price
sales for Jinfu Trading Co., Ltd.’s
(‘‘Jinfu’’) U.S. sales. See Shanghai
Eswell Enterprise, Co., Ltd., et. al. v.
United States, Slip Op. 07–138 (CIT
September 13, 2007) (‘‘Eswell I’’), at 17–
18. Pursuant to the CIT’s remand
instructions, we: 1) addressed record
evidence which indicated a decline in
export prices during the second half of
the POR and explained why we have
refrained from considering these data in
calculating a surrogate value for raw
honey; 2) (a) discussed evidence which
reflects an exact correlation between the
selling commission expenses incurred
by respondents, and those incurred by
the surrogate financial company and
further explained our decision in the
Final Results that the record evidence
was insufficient to permit a
circumstances of sale adjustment, as
well as (b) revised our financial ratio
calculations to include reported
expenses for jars and corks as direct
materials used for producing finished
honey and provided further explanation
regarding our finding that honey
machine purchases do not constitute
direct expenses; and 3) addressed the
CIT’s findings with respect to
operational control, and explained our
continued finding, in accordance with
our decision in the Final Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand: Jinfu Trading Co., Ltd. v.
United States, Court No. 04–00597, Slip
Op. 07–95 (CIT June 13, 2007).
On January 15, 2008, the Department
released the Draft Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand to interested parties. On
January 22 and January 24, 2008, we
received comments on the draft results
of redetermination from interested
parties. On February 11, 2008, the
Department filed its final results of
redetermination pursuant to Eswell I
with the CIT. See Final Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand: Shanghai Eswell Enterprise
Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 06–
00430 (February 11, 2008). In
responding to the CIT’s questions and
reassessing the record evidence, we
determined it was appropriate to revise
our financial ratio calculations to
include, as direct materials used to
producing finished honey, expenses for
jars and corks. Thus, the Department
revised, as appropriate, the surrogate
financial ratios of the margin
calculations for Eswell Enterprise Co.,
Ltd., Jinfu and Zhejiang Native Produce
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
75393
and Animal By–Products Import &
Export Group Corp. On November 18,
2008, the CIT sustained all aspects of
the redetermination made by the
Department pursuant to the CIT’s
remand of the Final Results.
In Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, the CAFC
held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(‘‘Act’’), the Department must publish a
notice of a court decision that is not ‘‘in
harmony’’ with a Department
determination, and must suspend
liquidation of entries pending a
‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The CIT’s
decision in Eswell II on November 18,
2008, constitutes a decision of the court
that is not in harmony with the
Department’s Final Results. This notice
is published in fulfillment of the
publication requirements of Timken.
Accordingly, the Department will
continue the suspension of liquidation
of the subject merchandise pending the
expiration of the period of appeal or, if
appealed, pending a final and
conclusive court decision. In the event
the CIT’s ruling is not appealed or, if
appealed, upheld by the CAFC, the
Department will publish an amended
final results and instruct U.S. Customs
and Border Protection to revise the cash
deposit rates covering the subject
merchandise and to assess antidumping
duties on entries of the subject
merchandise during the POR based on
the revised assessment rates calculated
by the Department.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with section 516A(c)(1) of
the Act.
Dated: December 5, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E8–29486 Filed 12–10–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–421–811]
Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From
the Netherlands: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
AGENCY: Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 7, 2008, the
Department of Commerce (Department)
published the preliminary results of the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on purified
carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) from the
E:\FR\FM\11DEN1.SGM
11DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 239 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 75393]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-29486]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(A-570-863)
Honey From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court
Decision Not in Harmony with Final Results of Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On November 18, 2008, the United States Court of International
Trade (``CIT'') sustained the remand redetermination issued by the
Department of Commerce (``Department'') pursuant to the CIT's remand
order in the final results of the administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on honey from the People's Republic of China.
See Shanghai Eswell Enterprise Co., Ltd., et. al. v. United States,
Court No. 05-00439, Slip Op. 08-124 (CIT November 18, 2008) (``Eswell
II''). This case arose from the Department's final results for the
period of review (``POR'') December 1, 2002, through November 30, 2003.
See Honey from the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Final
Rescission, In Part, of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 70 FR
38873 (July 6, 2005) (``Final Results''). Consistent with the decision
of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
(``CAFC'') in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (``Timken''), the Department is notifying the public that Eswell
II is not in harmony with the Department's Final Results.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 11, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Walker, AD/CVD Operations, Office
9, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Ave., NW,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0413.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 13, 2007, the CIT remanded the
following issues to the Department for further administrative
proceedings consistent with its opinion and Order: 1) the calculation
of the raw honey surrogate value; 2) the calculation of surrogate
financial ratios with respect to (a) the treatment of honey sales
commissions and (b) the treatment of jars, corks, and honey machine
purchases; and 3) the use of export price sales for Jinfu Trading Co.,
Ltd.'s (``Jinfu'') U.S. sales. See Shanghai Eswell Enterprise, Co.,
Ltd., et. al. v. United States, Slip Op. 07-138 (CIT September 13,
2007) (``Eswell I''), at 17-18. Pursuant to the CIT's remand
instructions, we: 1) addressed record evidence which indicated a
decline in export prices during the second half of the POR and
explained why we have refrained from considering these data in
calculating a surrogate value for raw honey; 2) (a) discussed evidence
which reflects an exact correlation between the selling commission
expenses incurred by respondents, and those incurred by the surrogate
financial company and further explained our decision in the Final
Results that the record evidence was insufficient to permit a
circumstances of sale adjustment, as well as (b) revised our financial
ratio calculations to include reported expenses for jars and corks as
direct materials used for producing finished honey and provided further
explanation regarding our finding that honey machine purchases do not
constitute direct expenses; and 3) addressed the CIT's findings with
respect to operational control, and explained our continued finding, in
accordance with our decision in the Final Results of Redetermination
Pursuant to Court Remand: Jinfu Trading Co., Ltd. v. United States,
Court No. 04-00597, Slip Op. 07-95 (CIT June 13, 2007).
On January 15, 2008, the Department released the Draft Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand to interested parties. On
January 22 and January 24, 2008, we received comments on the draft
results of redetermination from interested parties. On February 11,
2008, the Department filed its final results of redetermination
pursuant to Eswell I with the CIT. See Final Results of Redetermination
Pursuant to Court Remand: Shanghai Eswell Enterprise Co., Ltd. v.
United States, Court No. 06-00430 (February 11, 2008). In responding to
the CIT's questions and reassessing the record evidence, we determined
it was appropriate to revise our financial ratio calculations to
include, as direct materials used to producing finished honey, expenses
for jars and corks. Thus, the Department revised, as appropriate, the
surrogate financial ratios of the margin calculations for Eswell
Enterprise Co., Ltd., Jinfu and Zhejiang Native Produce and Animal By-
Products Import & Export Group Corp. On November 18, 2008, the CIT
sustained all aspects of the redetermination made by the Department
pursuant to the CIT's remand of the Final Results.
In Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, the CAFC held that, pursuant to section
516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``Act''), the Department
must publish a notice of a court decision that is not ``in harmony''
with a Department determination, and must suspend liquidation of
entries pending a ``conclusive'' court decision. The CIT's decision in
Eswell II on November 18, 2008, constitutes a decision of the court
that is not in harmony with the Department's Final Results. This notice
is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken.
Accordingly, the Department will continue the suspension of liquidation
of the subject merchandise pending the expiration of the period of
appeal or, if appealed, pending a final and conclusive court decision.
In the event the CIT's ruling is not appealed or, if appealed, upheld
by the CAFC, the Department will publish an amended final results and
instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to revise the cash deposit
rates covering the subject merchandise and to assess antidumping duties
on entries of the subject merchandise during the POR based on the
revised assessment rates calculated by the Department.
This notice is issued and published in accordance with section
516A(c)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 5, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E8-29486 Filed 12-10-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S