Floor-Standing, Metal-Top Ironing Tables and Certain Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results and Notice of Amended Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2008-2009, 36507-36509 [2015-15630]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 122 / Thursday, June 25, 2015 / Notices
4, 2015. Rebuttal comments in response
to material submitted during the
foregoing period may be submitted
during the subsequent 15-day period to
August 19, 2015.
A copy of the application will be
available for public inspection at the
Office of the Executive Secretary,
Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room
21013, U.S. Department of Commerce,
1401 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230–0002, and in the
‘‘Reading Room’’ section of the Board’s
Web site, which is accessible via
www.trade.gov/ftz.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Camille Evans at Camille.Evans@
trade.gov or (202) 482–2350.
Dated: June 19, 2015.
Elizabeth Whiteman,
Acting Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015–15635 Filed 6–24–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
treaty that seeks to achieve an
international ban on chemical weapons
(CW). The CWC prohibits, the use,
development, production, acquisition,
stockpiling, retention, and direct or
indirect transfer of chemical weapons.
This collection implements the
following provision of the treaty:
Schedule 1 notification and report:
Under Part VI of the CWC Verification
Annex, the United States is required to
notify the Organization for the
Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
(OPCW), the international organization
created to implement the CWC, at least
30 days before any transfer (export/
import) of Schedule 1 chemicals to
another State Party. The United States is
also required to submit annual reports
to the OPCW on all transfers of
Schedule 1 Chemicals.
End-Use Certificates: Under Part VIII
of the CWC Verification Annex, the
United States is required to obtain EndUse Certificates for transfers of Schedule
3 chemicals to Non-States Parties to
ensure the transferred chemicals are
only used for the purposes not
prohibited under the Convention.
Proposed Information Collection;
Comment Request; Chemical Weapons
Convention Provisions of the Export
Administration Regulations
II. Method of Collection
Bureau of Industry and
Security, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
OMB Control Number: 0694–0117.
Form Number(s): Not applicable.
Type of Review: Regular submission
extension.
Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
70.
Estimated Time per Response: 36
minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 42 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Cost to
Public: $0.
AGENCY:
The Department of
Commerce, as part of its continuing
effort to reduce paperwork and
respondent burden, invites the general
public and other Federal agencies to
take this opportunity to comment on
proposed and/or continuing information
collections, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: Written comments must be
submitted on or before August 24, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments
to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental
Paperwork Clearance Officer,
Department of Commerce, Room 6616,
14th and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230 (or via the
Internet at JJessup@doc.gov).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
copies of the information collection
instrument and instructions should be
directed to Mark Crace, BIS ICB Liaison,
(202) 482–8093, Mark.Crace@
bis.doc.gov.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Abstract
The Chemical Weapons Convention
(CWC) is a multilateral arms control
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Jun 24, 2015
Jkt 235001
Submitted electronically or on paper.
III. Data
IV. Request for Comments
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the
proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including through the
use of automated collection techniques
or other forms of information
technology.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and/or
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36507
included in the request for OMB
approval of this information collection;
they also will become a matter of public
record.
Sheleen Dumas,
Departmental PRA Lead, Office of the Chief
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2015–15542 Filed 6–24–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–33– P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–888]
Floor-Standing, Metal-Top Ironing
Tables and Certain Parts Thereof From
the People’s Republic of China: Notice
of Court Decision Not in Harmony With
Final Results and Notice of Amended
Final Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2008–2009
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 30, 2014, the
United States Court of International
Trade (the Court) issued final judgment
in Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co.,
Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 11–
00106, sustaining the Department of
Commerce’s (the Department) final
results of the third redetermination
pursuant to remand.1 Consistent with
the decision of the United States Court
of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
(Federal Circuit) in Timken Co., v.
United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken), as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United
States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010)
(Diamond Sawblades), the Department
is notifying the public that the final
judgment in this case is not in harmony
with the Department’s final results of
the antidumping duty administrative
review of floor-standing, metal top
ironing tables and certain parts thereof
from the People’s Republic of China
covering the period August 1, 2008,
through July 31, 2009, and is amending
the final results with respect to the
weighted-average dumping margin
assigned to both Since Hardware
(Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. (Since Hardware)
and Foshan Shunde Yongjian
AGENCY:
1 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand, Floor Standing Metal Top Ironing
Tables and Certain Parts Thereof from the People’s
Republic of China, Since Hardware (Guangzhou)
Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 11–00106, Slip
Op. 14–44 (CIT April 15, 2014), dated July 8, 2014
(Third Redetermination), available at https://
enforcement.trade.gov/remands/index.htm.
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
36508
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 122 / Thursday, June 25, 2015 / Notices
Housewares & Hardwares Co., Ltd.
(Foshan Shunde).2
DATES: Effective Date: January 9, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael J. Heaney or Robert James, AD/
CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement
and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–4475 or (202) 482–
0649, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On April 27, 2011, the Department
published its Amended Final Results.3
On April 28, 2011, Foshan Shunde and
Since Hardware, exporters of the subject
merchandise, timely filed complaints
with the Court to challenge certain
aspects of the Amended Final Results.
The litigation history of this procedure
is outlined below.
On August 14, 2012, the Court
remanded the matter.4 On December 17,
2012, the Department issued its First
Redetermination, in which it (1)
reconsidered the public availability of
the financial statements used in the
Final Results, (2) explained why the
Department selected the 2006–2007
financial statements of Infiniti Modules
(Infiniti) and declined to use the 2008–
2009 financial statements of either
Omax Autos (Omax) or Maximaa
Systems Limited (Maximaa), (3)
defended the Department’s brokerage
and handling calculation and responded
to the objections raised to that
calculation by Foshan Shunde, (4)
recalculated labor wage rates to conform
with the Court’s decision in Home
Products International,5 and (5)
recalculated the cotton conversion
factor used in the antidumping
calculation for Since Hardware.6
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
2 See
Floor-Standing Metal-Top Ironing Tables
and Certain Parts Thereof From the People’s
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 76 FR 15297 (March
21, 2011), and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum, as amended by Floor-Standing
Metal-Top Ironing Tables and Certain Parts Thereof
From the People’s Republic of China: Notice of
Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 76 FR 23543 (April 27,
2011) (collectively, Amended Final Results).
3 Id.
4 Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. v. United
States, Court No. 11–00106 (August 14, 2012)
(Since Hardware I).
5 See Home Products International Inc. v. United
States, Court No. 11–00104, Final Results of
Redetermination (March 14, 2012) (Home Products
International).
6 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand Floor Standing Metal-Top Ironing
Tables and Certain Parts Thereof from the People’s
Republic of China, dated December 17, 2012 (First
Redetermination).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Jun 24, 2015
Jkt 235001
Upon consideration of the First
Redetermination, on May 30, 2013, the
Court affirmed our (1) calculation of
Since Hardware’s cotton conversion
factor, (2) recalculation of labor
expense, (3) decision to reject the
financial statements of Omax as a source
of financial ratios, and (4) use of World
Bank data to derive brokerage and
handling expenses.7 The Court also
remanded the case to the Department to
reconsider: (1) Using financial
statements from Maximaa in light of the
fact that Infiniti’s statements are noncontemporaneous and present public
availability concerns, (2) the
respondent’s claim that World Bank
data unfairly represent brokerage and
handling costs, (3) respondent’s
evidence related to port and terminal
handling costs based on container size.8
On August 14, 2013, the Department
issued its Second Redetermination, in
which it further explained its basis for
selecting the financial statements of
Infiniti over those of Maximaa, (2)
recalculated the portion of Foshan
Shunde’s brokerage and handling
expense related to the container size
adjustment, and (3) reconsidered
Foshan Shunde’s objections regarding
the difference between inland and
seaport cities and determined that no
adjustment to that calculation is
warranted.9
On April 15, 2014, the Court affirmed
the Department’s financial statement
selection.10 However, the Court
remanded for further consideration
aspects of the Department’s brokerage
and handling calculation, and asked for
the Department to address zeroing in a
nonmarket economy context.11
On July 8, 2014, the Department filed
its Third Redetermination, in which it
recalculated the conversion factor for
Foshan Shunde, and the labor expense
rate for both Since Hardware and
Foshan Shunde consistent with the
instructions of the Court.12 Also, in the
Third Redetermination, under protest,
the Department recalculated the
brokerage and handling expense for
Foshan Shunde based upon the
7 See Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. v.
United States, Court No. 11–00106, Slip Op. 13–69
(May 30, 2013) (Since Hardware II).
8 Id.
9 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand Floor Standing Metal Ironing
Tables and Certain Parts Thereof from the People’s
Republic of China, Since Hardware (Guangzhou)
Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 11–00106,
dated August 14, 2013 (Second Redetermination).
10 See Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. v.
United States, Court No. 11–00106, Slip Op. 14–44
(April 15, 2014) (Since Hardware III).
11 Id.
12 See generally Third Redetermination.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
instructions set forth by the Court.13 On
December 30, 2014, the Court sustained
the Department’s Third
Redetermination, and entered final
judgment.14
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at
341, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades,
the Federal Circuit has held that,
pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the
Department must publish a notice of a
court decision not ‘‘in harmony’’ with a
Department determination, and must
suspend liquidation of entries pending
a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The
Court’s December 30, 2014, judgment
sustaining the Third Redetermination
constitutes a final decision of the Court
that is not in harmony with the
Department’s Amended Final Results.
This notice is published in fulfillment
of the publication requirement 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.
Second Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court
decision, the Department amends the
Amended Final Results with respect to
the dumping margin of Since Hardware
and Foshan Shunde. The revised
weighted-average dumping margin for
Since Hardware and Foshan Shunde
during the period August 1, 2008,
through July 31, 2009, is as follows:
Exporter
Since Hardware
(Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. ......
Foshan Shunde Yongjian
Housewares & Hardwares
Co., Ltd. ............................
Weighted
average
dumping
margin
(percent)
83.83
18.88
Because there have been no
subsequent review for Since Hardware,
the revised cash deposit rate for Since
Hardware is now 83.33 percent. For
Foshan Shunde, the cash deposit rate
will remain the rate established in the
2010–2011 Final Results, a subsequent
review, which is 157.68 percent.15
13 Id.
14 See Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. v.
United States, Court No. 11–00106, Slip Op. 14–159
(December 30, 2014).
15 See Floor Standing Metal-Top Ironing Tables
and Certain Parts Thereof From the People’s
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review (2010–2011 Final
Results).
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 122 / Thursday, June 25, 2015 / Notices
In the event the Court’s ruling is not
appealed, or if appealed and upheld by
the Federal Circuit, the Department will
instruct U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping
duties on entries of the subject
merchandise exported by Since
Hardware and Foshan Shunde using the
revised assessment rate calculated by
the Department in the Third
Redetermination.
Cash Deposit Requirements
In accordance with section
735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department
will instruct CBP to collect a cash
deposit of 83.33 percent for entries of
subject merchandise exported by Since
Hardware, effective January 9, 2015, in
accordance with the Timken Notice.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516(A)(e),
751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: June 18, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement &
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015–15630 Filed 6–24–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
The Department of Commerce will
submit to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for clearance the
following proposal for collection of
information under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35).
Agency: National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Title: Scientific Research, Exempted
Fishing, and Exempted Educational
Activity Submissions.
OMB Control Number: 0648–0309.
Form Number(s): None.
Type of Request: Regular (extension of
a currently approved information
collection).
Number of Respondents: 143.
Average Hours per Response:
Scientific research plans, 9 hours;
scientific research reports, 4 hours;
exempted fishing permit requests; 89
hours, exempted fishing permit reports,
15 hours; exempted educational
requests, 4 hours; exempted educational
reports, 2 hours.
Burden Hours: 7,753.
Needs and Uses: This request is for
extension of a current information
collection.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Jun 24, 2015
Jkt 235001
Fishery regulations do not generally
affect scientific research activities
conducted by a scientific research
vessel. Persons planning to conduct
such research are encouraged to submit
a scientific research plan to ensure that
the activities are considered research
and not fishing. The researchers are
requested to submit reports of their
scientific research activity after its
completion. Eligible researchers on
board federally permitted fishing vessels
that plan to temporarily possess fish in
a manner not compliant with applicable
fishing regulations for the purpose of
collecting scientific data on catch may
submit a request for a temporary
possession letter of authorization. The
researchers are requested to submit
reports of their scientific research
activity after its completion. The
National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) may also grant exemptions from
fishery regulations for educational or
other activities (e.g., using nonregulation gear). The applications for
these exemptions must be submitted, as
well as reports on activities.
Affected Public: Business or other forprofit; individuals or households; not
for profit organizations; state, local or
tribal governments.
Frequency: Annually, on occasion and
as required by permits.
Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory.
This information collection request
may be viewed at reginfo.gov. Follow
the instructions to view Department of
Commerce collections currently under
review by OMB.
Written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent
within 30 days of publication of this
notice to OIRA_Submission@
omb.eop.gov or fax to (202) 395–5806.
Dated: June 19, 2015.
Sarah Brabson,
NOAA PRA Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2015–15583 Filed 6–24–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
The Department of Commerce will
submit to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for clearance the
following proposal for collection of
information under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35).
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36509
Agency: National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Title: Seafood Inspection and
Certification Requirements.
OMB Control Number: 0648-0266.
Form Number(s): NOAA Forms 89–
800, 89–814, 89–819.
Type of Request: Regular (extension of
a currently approved information
collection).
Number of Respondents: 4,260.
Average Hours per Response: Contract
Request, 15 minutes; label approval, 15
minutes; Inspection Request, 30
minutes.
Burden Hours: 19,768.
Needs and Uses: This request is for
extension of a currently approved
information collection.
The National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) operates a voluntary fee-forservice seafood inspection program
(Program) under the authorities of the
Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as
amended, the Fish and Wildlife Act of
1956, and the Reorganization Plan No.
4 of 1970. The regulations for the
Program are contained in 50 CFR part
260. The program offers inspection
grading and certification services,
including the use of official quality
grade marks which indicate that specific
products have been Federally inspected.
Those wishing to participate in the
program must request the services and
submit specific compliance information.
In July 1992, NMFS announced new
inspection services, which were fully
based on guidelines recommended by
the National Academy of Sciences,
known as Hazard Analysis Critical
Control Point (HACCP). The information
collection requirements fall under
§ 260.15 of the regulations. These
guidelines required that a facility’s
quality control system have a written
plan of the operation, identification of
control points with acceptance criteria
and a corrective action plan, as well as
identified personnel responsible for
oversight of the system.
Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations; not-for-profit
institutions; state, local, or tribal
government.
Frequency: On occasion.
Respondent’s Obligation: Required to
obtain or retain benefits.
This information collection request
may be viewed at reginfo.gov. Follow
the instructions to view Department of
Commerce collections currently under
review by OMB.
Written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent
within 30 days of publication of this
notice to OIRA_Submission@
omb.eop.gov or fax to (202) 395–5806.
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 122 (Thursday, June 25, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36507-36509]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15630]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-888]
Floor-Standing, Metal-Top Ironing Tables and Certain Parts
Thereof From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision
Not in Harmony With Final Results and Notice of Amended Final Results
of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2008-2009
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 30, 2014, the United States Court of International
Trade (the Court) issued final judgment in Since Hardware (Guangzhou)
Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 11-00106, sustaining the
Department of Commerce's (the Department) final results of the third
redetermination pursuant to remand.\1\ Consistent with the decision of
the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal
Circuit) in Timken Co., v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990)
(Timken), as clarified by Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United
States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades), the
Department is notifying the public that the final judgment in this case
is not in harmony with the Department's final results of the
antidumping duty administrative review of floor-standing, metal top
ironing tables and certain parts thereof from the People's Republic of
China covering the period August 1, 2008, through July 31, 2009, and is
amending the final results with respect to the weighted-average dumping
margin assigned to both Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. (Since
Hardware) and Foshan Shunde Yongjian
[[Page 36508]]
Housewares & Hardwares Co., Ltd. (Foshan Shunde).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand, Floor Standing Metal Top Ironing Tables and Certain Parts
Thereof from the People's Republic of China, Since Hardware
(Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 11-00106, Slip Op.
14-44 (CIT April 15, 2014), dated July 8, 2014 (Third
Redetermination), available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/index.htm.
\2\ See Floor-Standing Metal-Top Ironing Tables and Certain
Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 76 FR 15297 (March 21,
2011), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum, as amended
by Floor-Standing Metal-Top Ironing Tables and Certain Parts Thereof
From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Amended Final Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 76 FR 23543 (April 27,
2011) (collectively, Amended Final Results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: January 9, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael J. Heaney or Robert James, AD/
CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
4475 or (202) 482-0649, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On April 27, 2011, the Department published its Amended Final
Results.\3\ On April 28, 2011, Foshan Shunde and Since Hardware,
exporters of the subject merchandise, timely filed complaints with the
Court to challenge certain aspects of the Amended Final Results. The
litigation history of this procedure is outlined below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 14, 2012, the Court remanded the matter.\4\ On December
17, 2012, the Department issued its First Redetermination, in which it
(1) reconsidered the public availability of the financial statements
used in the Final Results, (2) explained why the Department selected
the 2006-2007 financial statements of Infiniti Modules (Infiniti) and
declined to use the 2008-2009 financial statements of either Omax Autos
(Omax) or Maximaa Systems Limited (Maximaa), (3) defended the
Department's brokerage and handling calculation and responded to the
objections raised to that calculation by Foshan Shunde, (4)
recalculated labor wage rates to conform with the Court's decision in
Home Products International,\5\ and (5) recalculated the cotton
conversion factor used in the antidumping calculation for Since
Hardware.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court
No. 11-00106 (August 14, 2012) (Since Hardware I).
\5\ See Home Products International Inc. v. United States, Court
No. 11-00104, Final Results of Redetermination (March 14, 2012)
(Home Products International).
\6\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand Floor Standing Metal-Top Ironing Tables and Certain Parts
Thereof from the People's Republic of China, dated December 17, 2012
(First Redetermination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Upon consideration of the First Redetermination, on May 30, 2013,
the Court affirmed our (1) calculation of Since Hardware's cotton
conversion factor, (2) recalculation of labor expense, (3) decision to
reject the financial statements of Omax as a source of financial
ratios, and (4) use of World Bank data to derive brokerage and handling
expenses.\7\ The Court also remanded the case to the Department to
reconsider: (1) Using financial statements from Maximaa in light of the
fact that Infiniti's statements are non-contemporaneous and present
public availability concerns, (2) the respondent's claim that World
Bank data unfairly represent brokerage and handling costs, (3)
respondent's evidence related to port and terminal handling costs based
on container size.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. v. United States,
Court No. 11-00106, Slip Op. 13-69 (May 30, 2013) (Since Hardware
II).
\8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 14, 2013, the Department issued its Second
Redetermination, in which it further explained its basis for selecting
the financial statements of Infiniti over those of Maximaa, (2)
recalculated the portion of Foshan Shunde's brokerage and handling
expense related to the container size adjustment, and (3) reconsidered
Foshan Shunde's objections regarding the difference between inland and
seaport cities and determined that no adjustment to that calculation is
warranted.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand Floor Standing Metal Ironing Tables and Certain Parts Thereof
from the People's Republic of China, Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co.,
Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 11-00106, dated August 14, 2013
(Second Redetermination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 15, 2014, the Court affirmed the Department's financial
statement selection.\10\ However, the Court remanded for further
consideration aspects of the Department's brokerage and handling
calculation, and asked for the Department to address zeroing in a
nonmarket economy context.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. v. United States,
Court No. 11-00106, Slip Op. 14-44 (April 15, 2014) (Since Hardware
III).
\11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 8, 2014, the Department filed its Third Redetermination, in
which it recalculated the conversion factor for Foshan Shunde, and the
labor expense rate for both Since Hardware and Foshan Shunde consistent
with the instructions of the Court.\12\ Also, in the Third
Redetermination, under protest, the Department recalculated the
brokerage and handling expense for Foshan Shunde based upon the
instructions set forth by the Court.\13\ On December 30, 2014, the
Court sustained the Department's Third Redetermination, and entered
final judgment.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See generally Third Redetermination.
\13\ Id.
\14\ See Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. v. United States,
Court No. 11-00106, Slip Op. 14-159 (December 30, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades, the Federal Circuit has held that, pursuant to section
516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department
must publish a notice of a court decision not ``in harmony'' with a
Department determination, and must suspend liquidation of entries
pending a ``conclusive'' court decision. The Court's December 30, 2014,
judgment sustaining the Third Redetermination constitutes a final
decision of the Court that is not in harmony with the Department's
Amended Final Results. This notice is published in fulfillment of the
publication requirement 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.
Second Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court decision, the Department amends
the Amended Final Results with respect to the dumping margin of Since
Hardware and Foshan Shunde. The revised weighted-average dumping margin
for Since Hardware and Foshan Shunde during the period August 1, 2008,
through July 31, 2009, is as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted
average
Exporter dumping
margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd..................... 83.83
Foshan Shunde Yongjian Housewares & Hardwares Co., Ltd.. 18.88
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because there have been no subsequent review for Since Hardware,
the revised cash deposit rate for Since Hardware is now 83.33 percent.
For Foshan Shunde, the cash deposit rate will remain the rate
established in the 2010-2011 Final Results, a subsequent review, which
is 157.68 percent.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Floor Standing Metal-Top Ironing Tables and Certain
Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review (2010-2011 Final Results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 36509]]
In the event the Court's ruling is not appealed, or if appealed and
upheld by the Federal Circuit, the Department will instruct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping duties on
entries of the subject merchandise exported by Since Hardware and
Foshan Shunde using the revised assessment rate calculated by the
Department in the Third Redetermination.
Cash Deposit Requirements
In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, the Department
will instruct CBP to collect a cash deposit of 83.33 percent for
entries of subject merchandise exported by Since Hardware, effective
January 9, 2015, in accordance with the Timken Notice.
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516(A)(e), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: June 18, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement & Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-15630 Filed 6-24-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
