Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Results of Review and Amended Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 2844-2845 [2016-00923]
Download as PDF
2844
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2016 / Notices
chosen methodology.4 On remand, the
Department (1) denied the ATM Single
Entity a separate rate and revised the
PRC-wide rate; (2) explained that the
Department’s practice is to require
targeted dumping allegations before the
preliminary results and, because DSMC
filed the targeted dumping allegation
after the preliminary results, the
targeted dumping allegation in this
review was untimely; and (3) explained
the Department’s methodology for
valuing Weihai’s steel cores.5 On
October 21, 2015, the Court upheld our
final remand redetermination for this
review in its entirety.6
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, as clarified
by Diamond Sawblades, the CAFC 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 that is not ‘‘in
harmony’’ with a Department
determination and must suspend
liquidation of entries pending a
‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The
Court’s final judgment affirming the
final remand redetermination
constitutes the Court’s final decision
which is not in harmony with the AR2
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 a final and
conclusive court decision.
Amended Final Results of Review
Because there is now a final court
decision, the Department is amending
the AR2 Final Results with respect to
the PRC-wide entity, which includes the
ATM Single Entity, as follows:
Exporter
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
PRC-Wide Entity (which includes the ATM Single Entity) ..........................................
Weightedaverage
dumping
margin
(percent)
82.05
In the event the Court’s ruling is
upheld by a final and conclusive court
decision, the Department will instruct
the U.S. Customs and Border Protection
to assess antidumping duties on
unliquidated entries of subject
4 See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers
Coalition v. United States, Court No. 13–00241, slip
op. 14–112 (Ct. Int’l Trade Sept. 23, 2014).
5 See AR2 Remand.
6 See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’
Coalition v. United States, Court No. 13–00241, slip
op. 15–116 (Ct. Int’l Trade Oct. 21, 2015).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:50 Jan 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
merchandise based on the revised rate
the Department determined and listed
above.
Cash Deposit Requirements
Since the AR2 Remand, the
Department has established a new cash
deposit rate for the PRC-wide entity,
which includes the ATM Single Entity.7
Therefore, the cash deposit rate for the
PRC-wide entity does not need to be
updated as a result of these amended
final results.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(e)(1),
751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: January 12, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d
1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond
Sawblades), the Department of
Commerce (the Department) is notifying
the public that the Court’s final
judgment in this case is not in harmony
with the AR1 Final Results 2 and that
the Department is amending the AR1
Final Results with respect to the ATM
Single Entity 3 and the PRC-wide entity.
DATES: Effective Date: October 3, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Yang Jin Chun or Minoo Hatten, AD/
CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement
and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone (202) 482–5760 or (202) 482–
1690, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2016–00917 Filed 1–15–16; 8:45 am]
Background
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
On February 15, 2013, the Department
published the AR1 Final Results. The
Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’
Coalition challenged the Department’s
decisions to grant the ATM Single
Entity a separate rate and to not collapse
the state-owned enterprise, China Iron &
Steel Research Institute, within the
ATM Single Entity.4 The Department
requested a voluntary remand to
reconsider the separate rate eligibility
for the ATM Single Entity in this review
and the Court granted the Department’s
request.5 On remand, the Department
determined that the ATM Single Entity
was ineligible for a separate rate and
also revised the PRC-wide rate.6 On
September 23, 2015, the Court entered
judgment sustaining the final remand
redetermination for this review in its
entirety.7
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–900]
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
From the People’s Republic of China:
Notice of Court Decision Not in
Harmony With the Final Results of
Review and Amended Final Results of
the Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 23, 2015, the
United States Court of International
Trade (Court) sustained our final
remand redetermination pertaining to
the administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on diamond
sawblades and parts thereof from the
People’s Republic of China covering the
period January 23, 2009, through
October 31, 2010.1 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), as
clarified by Diamond Sawblades Mfrs.
AGENCY:
7 See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
From the People’s Republic of China; Final Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012–
2013, 80 FR 32344 (June 8, 2015).
1 See Final Results of Redetermination pursuant
to Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’ Coalition v.
United States, Court No. 13–00078, slip op. 14–50
(Ct. Int’l Trade April 29, 2014), dated April 10,
2015, and available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/
remands/14–50.pdf (AR1 Remand), aff’d, Diamond
Sawblades Manufacturers’ Coalition v. United
States, Court No. 13–00078, slip op. 15–105 (Ct.
Int’l Trade September 23, 2015).
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, as clarified
by Diamond Sawblades, the CAFC held
that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
the Department must publish a notice of
2 See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2009–
2010, 78 FR 11143 (February 15, 2013) (AR1 Final
Results).
3 The ATM Single Entity includes Advanced
Technology & Materials Co., Ltd., Beijing Gang Yan
Diamond Products Co., HXF Saw Co., Ltd., AT&M
International Trading Co., Ltd., and Cliff
International Ltd. See AR1 Final Results, 78 FR at
11144–45 n.9.
4 See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’
Coalition v. United States, Court No. 13–00078, slip
op. 14–50 (Ct. Int’l Trade April 29, 2014).
5 Id.
6 See AR1 Remand.
7 See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’
Coalition v. United States, Court No. 13–00078, slip
op. 15–105 (Ct. Int’l Trade Sept. 23, 2015).
E:\FR\FM\19JAN1.SGM
19JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2016 / Notices
a court decision that is not ‘‘in
harmony’’ with a Department
determination and must suspend
liquidation of entries pending a
‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The
Court’s final judgment affirming the
final remand redetermination
constitutes the Court’s final decision
which is not in harmony with the AR1
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 a final and
conclusive court decision.
Amended Final Results of Review
Because there is now a final court
decision, the Department is amending
the AR1 Final Results with respect to
the PRC-wide entity, which includes the
ATM Single Entity, as follows:
Exporter
PRC-Wide Entity (which includes the ATM Single Entity) ..........................................
Weightedaverage
dumping
margin
(percent)
82.12
In the event the Court’s ruling is
upheld by a final and conclusive court
decision, the Department will instruct
the U.S. Customs and Border Protection
to assess antidumping duties on
unliquidated entries of subject
merchandise based on the revised rate
the Department determined and listed
above.
Cash Deposit Requirements
Since the AR1 Remand, the
Department has established a new cash
deposit rate for the PRC-wide entity,
which includes the ATM Single Entity.8
Therefore, the cash deposit rate for the
PRC-wide entity does not need to be
updated as a result of these amended
final results.
Notification to Interested Parties
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(e)(1),
751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: January 12, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016–00923 Filed 1–15–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
8 See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
From the People’s Republic of China; Final Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012–
2013, 80 FR 32344 (June 8, 2015).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:50 Jan 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–918]
Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the
People’s Republic of China; 2014–
2015; Partial Rescission of the Seventh
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 3, 2015, the
Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) published a notice of
initiation of an administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on steel
wire garment hangers from the People’s
Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). Based on
M&B Metal Products Co., Ltd.’s
(‘‘Petitioner’’) timely withdrawal of the
requests for review of certain
companies, we are now rescinding this
administrative review with respect to 44
companies.
DATES: Effective January 19, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jessica Weeks, AD/CVD Operations,
Office V, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202)
482–4877.
AGENCY:
Background
On October 1, 2015, the Department
published a notice of ‘‘Opportunity to
Request Administrative Review’’ of the
antidumping order on steel wire
garment hangers from the PRC.1 In
November 2015, the Department
received multiple timely requests to
conduct an administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on steel wire
garment hangers from the PRC.2 Based
upon these requests, on December 3,
2015, the Department published a notice
of initiation of an administrative review
of the Order covering the period October
1, 2014, to September 30, 2015.3 The
Department initiated the administrative
review with respect to 46 companies.4
On December 16, 2015, Petitioner
withdrew its request for an
1 See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order,
Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity
To Request Administrative Review, 80 FR 59135
(October 1, 2015).
2 See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Steel
Wire Garment Hangers From the People’s Republic
of China, 73 FR 58111 (October 6, 2008) (‘‘Order’’).
3 See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 80 FR
75657 (December 3, 2015).
4 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2845
administrative review on 44
companies.5
Partial Rescission
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the
Secretary will rescind an administrative
review, in whole or in part, if a party
who requested the review withdraws
the request within 90 days of the date
of publication of notice of initiation of
the requested review. All requests for
administrative reviews on the 44
companies listed in the Appendix were
withdrawn.6 Accordingly, we are
rescinding this review, in part, with
respect to these entities, in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1).
This administrative review will
continue with respect to Shanghai Wells
Hanger Co., Ltd. and Hong Kong Wells
Ltd.
Assessment
The Department will instruct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’)
to assess antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries. For the companies
for which this review is rescinded,
antidumping duties shall be assessed at
rates equal to the cash deposit of
estimated antidumping duties required
at the time of entry, or withdrawal from
warehouse, for consumption, in
accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(c)(1)(i). The Department
intends to issue appropriate assessment
instructions directly to CBP 15 days
after publication of this notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as the only
reminder to importers for whom this
review is being rescinded, as of the
publication date of this notice, of their
responsibility under 19 CFR
351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of
antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this
review period. Failure to comply with
this requirement could result in the
Secretary’s presumption that
reimbursement of the antidumping
duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping
duties.
5 See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from
Petitioner ‘‘Seventh Administrative Review of Steel
Wire Garment Hangers from China—Petitioner’s
Withdrawal of Review Request’’ (December 16,
2015).
6 As stated in Change in Practice in NME Reviews,
the Department will no longer consider the nonmarket economy (‘‘NME’’) entity as an exporter
conditionally subject to administrative reviews. See
Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of
Change in Department Practice for Respondent
Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and
Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy
Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78
FR 65963 (November 4, 2013).
E:\FR\FM\19JAN1.SGM
19JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 11 (Tuesday, January 19, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2844-2845]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-00923]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-900]
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of
China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Results
of Review and Amended Final Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 23, 2015, the United States Court of
International Trade (Court) sustained our final remand redetermination
pertaining to the administrative review of the antidumping duty order
on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from the People's Republic of
China covering the period January 23, 2009, through October 31,
2010.\1\ 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), as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir.
2010) (Diamond Sawblades), the Department of Commerce (the Department)
is notifying the public that the Court's final judgment in this case is
not in harmony with the AR1 Final Results \2\ and that the Department
is amending the AR1 Final Results with respect to the ATM Single Entity
\3\ and the PRC-wide entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Final Results of Redetermination pursuant to Diamond
Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. United States, Court No. 13-
00078, slip op. 14-50 (Ct. Int'l Trade April 29, 2014), dated April
10, 2015, and available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/14-50.pdf (AR1 Remand), aff'd, Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers'
Coalition v. United States, Court No. 13-00078, slip op. 15-105 (Ct.
Int'l Trade September 23, 2015).
\2\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2009-2010, 78 FR 11143 (February 15, 2013) (AR1 Final
Results).
\3\ The ATM Single Entity includes Advanced Technology &
Materials Co., Ltd., Beijing Gang Yan Diamond Products Co., HXF Saw
Co., Ltd., AT&M International Trading Co., Ltd., and Cliff
International Ltd. See AR1 Final Results, 78 FR at 11144-45 n.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: October 3, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yang Jin Chun or Minoo Hatten, AD/CVD
Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-5760
or (202) 482-1690, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On February 15, 2013, the Department published the AR1 Final
Results. The Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition challenged the
Department's decisions to grant the ATM Single Entity a separate rate
and to not collapse the state-owned enterprise, China Iron & Steel
Research Institute, within the ATM Single Entity.\4\ The Department
requested a voluntary remand to reconsider the separate rate
eligibility for the ATM Single Entity in this review and the Court
granted the Department's request.\5\ On remand, the Department
determined that the ATM Single Entity was ineligible for a separate
rate and also revised the PRC-wide rate.\6\ On September 23, 2015, the
Court entered judgment sustaining the final remand redetermination for
this review in its entirety.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. United
States, Court No. 13-00078, slip op. 14-50 (Ct. Int'l Trade April
29, 2014).
\5\ Id.
\6\ See AR1 Remand.
\7\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. United
States, Court No. 13-00078, slip op. 15-105 (Ct. Int'l Trade Sept.
23, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, the
CAFC held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (the Act), the Department must publish a notice of
[[Page 2845]]
a court decision that is not ``in harmony'' with a Department
determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a
``conclusive'' court decision. The Court's final judgment affirming the
final remand redetermination constitutes the Court's final decision
which is not in harmony with the AR1 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 a final and conclusive court
decision.
Amended Final Results of Review
Because there is now a final court decision, the Department is
amending the AR1 Final Results with respect to the PRC-wide entity,
which includes the ATM Single Entity, as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Exporter dumping
margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-Wide Entity (which includes the ATM Single Entity).... 82.12
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the event the Court's ruling is upheld by a final and conclusive
court decision, the Department will instruct the U.S. Customs and
Border Protection to assess antidumping duties on unliquidated entries
of subject merchandise based on the revised rate the Department
determined and listed above.
Cash Deposit Requirements
Since the AR1 Remand, the Department has established a new cash
deposit rate for the PRC-wide entity, which includes the ATM Single
Entity.\8\ Therefore, the cash deposit rate for the PRC-wide entity
does not need to be updated as a result of these amended final results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's
Republic of China; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2012-2013, 80 FR 32344 (June 8, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: January 12, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-00923 Filed 1-15-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P