Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Results of the Second Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 83888-83890 [2020-28400]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
83888
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 23, 2020 / Notices
the less-than-fair-value investigation, if
there is no rate for the intermediate
company(ies) involved in the
transaction.18 For a full discussion of
this matter, see Assessment Policy
Notice.19
For those companies which were not
individually examined, we will instruct
CBP to assess antidumping duties at an
ad valorem rate equal to that companies
weighted-average dumping margin as
determined in the final results of this
review.
In accordance with 19 CFR 356.8, we
intend to issue liquidation instructions
to CBP on or after 41 days after
publication of the final results of this
review.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this
administrative review for all shipments
of the subject merchandise entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication
date of the final results of this
administrative review, as provided by
section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The
cash deposit rate for each specific
company listed above will be equal to
the weighted-average dumping margin
established in the final results of this
administrative review; (2) for previously
reviewed or investigated companies not
listed above, the cash deposit rate will
continue to be the company-specific rate
published for the most recently
completed segment of this proceeding in
which they were reviewed; (3) if the
exporter is not a firm covered in this
review, a prior review, or in the
investigation but the producer is, the
cash deposit rate will be the rate
established for the most recently
completed segment of this proceeding
for the producer of the merchandise;
and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other
producers or exporters will continue to
be the all-others rate of 3.76 percent.20
These cash deposit requirements, when
imposed, shall remain in effect until
further notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a reminder
to importers 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
18 See
Order, 73 FR at 45405.
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68
FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Assessment Policy Notice).
20 See Order, 73 FR at 45405.
19 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:21 Dec 22, 2020
Jkt 253001
result in the Department’s presumption
that reimbursement of antidumping
duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping
duties.
Notification to Interested Parties
We are issuing and publishing this
notice in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.221(b)(4).
Dated: December 16, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Appendix
List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary
Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Partial Rescission of Administrative
Review
V. Companies Not Selected for Individual
Examination
VI. Successor-in-Interest
VII. Single Entity Treatment
VIII. Discussion of the Methodology
IX. Currency Conversion
X. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2020–28347 Filed 12–22–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
ADMINISTRATION
[A–570–970]
Multilayered Wood Flooring From the
People’s Republic of China: Notice of
Court Decision Not in Harmony With
the Final Results of the Second
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 10, 2020, the
United States Court of International
Trade (the Court) entered final judgment
sustaining the final results of the second
remand redetermination pursuant to
court order by the Department of
Commerce (Commerce) pertaining to the
antidumping duty administrative review
of multilayered wood flooring (MLWF)
from the People’s Republic of China
(China) covering the period of review
(POR), December 1, 2012 through
November 30, 2013. Commerce is
notifying the public that the final
judgment in this case is not in harmony
with Commerce’s final results in the
2012–2013 administrative review of
MLWF from China.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DATES:
Applicable December 20, 2020
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Aleksandras Nakutis, Office IV,
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC, 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3147.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On July 15, 2015, Commerce
published the Final Results in the 2012–
2013 administrative review of
multilayered wood flooring from China
in which Commerce assigned a rate of
13.74 percent to Jiangsu Senmao
Bamboo and Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
(Senmao) and all separate rate
respondents in the Final Results.1
Commerce applied the weighted-average
dumping margin of Senmao (the only
mandatory respondent to receive a rate
that was not de minimis or based solely
on adverse facts available) to all parties
eligible for a separate rate, pursuant to
section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act).2
Senmao and certain separate rate
respondents appealed the Final Results.
In its first remand order, the Court
directed Commerce to reconsider or
further explain certain of its surrogate
value selections, its downward
adjustment for irrevocable VAT, as well
as its decision to deny voluntary
respondent status to Fine Furniture
(Shanghai) Limited (Fine Furniture).3
Upon reconsidering these issues in the
First Remand Redetermination,
Commerce made certain changes and
calculated a revised weighted-average
dumping margin for Senmao and the
separate rate companies.4
In Senmao II, the Court affirmed the
First Remand Redetermination as it
pertained to the surrogate value
selections.5 However, the Court found
that Commerce’s downward adjustment
for irrevocable VAT was contrary to law
in relying upon an unlawful
interpretation of the Act.6 The Court,
1 See Multilayered Wood Flooring From the
People’s Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and
Final Results of New Shipper Review; 2012–2013,
80 FR 41476 (July 15, 2015) (Final Results).
2 Id.
3 See Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry
Co., Ltd., et al. , v. United States, 322 F. Supp 3d
1308 (CIT 2018) (Senmao I).
4 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Order, Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood
Industry Co., Ltd., et al. , v. United States, dated
June 3, 2019 (First Remand Redetermination).
5 See Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry
Co., Ltd., et al., v. United States, Court No. 15–
00225. Slip Op. 20–31 (March 11, 2020) (Senmao
II).
6 Id.
E:\FR\FM\23DEN1.SGM
23DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 23, 2020 / Notices
thus, remanded the case, so that
Commerce could correct the error
regarding the downward adjustment for
irrevocable VAT.
In the Second Remand
Redetermination,7 Commerce removed
the downward adjustment for
irrevocable VAT as directed by the
Court and revised the weighted-average
dumping margin for Senmao to 3.92
percent.8 Additionally, because the rate
for separate rate respondents was based
entirely on Senmao’s weighted-average
dumping margin, Senmao’s margin of
3.92 percent was applied to those
separate rate respondents which were
party to the litigation.
On December 10, 2020, the Court
entered final judgment in Senmao III.9
The Court sustained the Second
Remand Redetermination excluding any
downward adjustment for irrevocable
VAT and revising the weighted-average
dumping margin for Senmao and the
other separate rate entities that are party
to the litigation.
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, as clarified
by Diamond Sawblades, the CAFC held
that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the
Act, Commerce must publish a notice of
a court decision that is not ‘‘in
harmony’’ with Commerce’s
determination and must suspend
liquidation of entries pending a
‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The
Court’s December 10, 2020 final
judgment affirming the Second Remand
Redetermination 10 constitutes a final
decision of the Court that is not in
harmony with the Final Results.11 This
notice is published in fulfillment of the
publication requirements of Timken.
Amended Final Determination
There is now a final court decision
with respect to the Final Results with
respect to the irrevocable VAT
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
7 See
Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Order, Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood
Industry Co., Ltd., et al., v. United States, dated May
8, 2020 (Second Remand Redetermination).
8 Id.
9 See Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry
Co., Ltd., et al. v. United States, Consol. Court No.
19–00225 (Senmao III). In Senmao III, the Court did
not address a previous issue concerning Fine
Furniture. However, on September 9, 2020, the
Court granted Fine Furniture’s request to dissolve
its injunction covering subject entries during the
POR, ECF No. 174, because Fine Furniture and
Double F Limited are excluded from the order and
no party sought appeal of Changzhou Hawd
Flooring Co. v. United States, 947 F.3d 781 (Fed Cir.
2020) (affirming Fine Furniture and Double F
Limited’s exclusion from the order). Accordingly,
because Fine Furniture and Double F Limited are
excluded from the order, the issue regarding Fine
Furniture is moot.
10 Id.
11 See Final Results.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:21 Dec 22, 2020
Jkt 253001
adjustment. Accordingly, Commerce is
amending the Final Results and
assigning the revised weighted-average
dumping margin for Senmao and the
separate rate respondents which are
parties to the litigation. Additionally,
Commerce is amending the revised
weighted-average dumping margins for
these companies as follows:
Weightedaverage
dumping
margin
(percent)
Exporter 12
Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and
Wood Industry Co., Ltd ...........
Baishan Huafeng Wooden Product Co., Ltd., (aka Baishan
Huafeng Wood Product Co.,
Ltd.) .........................................
Changbai Mountain Development and Protection Zone
Hongtu Wood Industrial Co.,
Ltd ...........................................
Chinafloors Timber (China) Co.,
Ltd ...........................................
Dalian Kemian Wood Industry
Co., Ltd ...................................
Dalian Penghong Floor Products
Co., Ltd ...................................
Dalien Qianqiu Wooden Product
Co., Ltd ...................................
Dasso Industrial Group Co., Ltd
Dongtai Fuan Universal Dynamics, LLC ...................................
Dunhua City Hongyuan Wood
Industry Co., Ltd .....................
Dun Hua Sen Tai Wood Co., Ltd
Dunhua City Wanrong Wood Industry Co., Ltd ........................
Fusong Jinlong Wooden Group
Co., Ltd ...................................
Fusong Jinqiu Wooden Product
Co., Ltd ...................................
Fusong Qianqiu Wooden Product Co., Ltd .............................
Guangdong Yihua Timber Industry Co., Ltd ..............................
Guangzhou Panyu Kangda
Board Co., Ltd .........................
HaiLin LinJing Wooden Products, Ltd ..................................
Hangzhou Hanje Tec Co., Ltd ....
Hangzhou Zhengtian Industrial
Co., Ltd ...................................
Hunchun Forest Wolf Wooden
Industry Co., Ltd .....................
Huzhou Chenghang Wood Co.,
Ltd ...........................................
Huzhou Fulinmen Imp. & Exp.
Co., Ltd ...................................
Jiafeng Wood (Suzhou) Co., Ltd
Jiangsu Guyu International Trading Co., Ltd .............................
Jiangsu Kentier Wood Co., Ltd ..
Jiangsu Mingle Flooring Co.,
Ltd.13 .......................................
Jiangsu Simba Flooring Co.,
Ltd.14 .......................................
Jiashan HuiJiale Decoration Material Co., Ltd ..........................
Jilin Forest Industry Jinqiao
Flooring Group Co., Ltd ..........
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
Exporter 12
Kemian Wood Industry
(Kunshan) Co., Ltd ..................
Metropolitan Hardwood Floors,
Inc ...........................................
Mudanjiang Bosen Wood Industry Co., Ltd ..............................
Nakahiro Jyou Sei Furniture
(Dalian) Co., Ltd ......................
Nanjing Minglin Wooden Industry
Co., Ltd ...................................
Puli Trading Limited ....................
Shanghai Eswell Timber Co., Ltd
Shanghai Shenlin Corp ..............
Shanghai Lizhong Wood Products Co., Ltd./The Lizhong
Wood Industry Limited Company of Shanghai/Linyi
Youyou Wood Co., Ltd ...........
Shenyang Haobainian Wooden
Co., Ltd ...................................
Shenzhenshi Huanwei Woods
Co., Ltd ...................................
Suzhou Dongda Wood Co.,
Ltd.15 .......................................
Tongxiang Jisheng Import and
Export Co., Ltd ........................
Xuzhou Shenghe Wood Co., Ltd
Yingyi-Nature (Kunshan) Wood
Industry Co., Ltd .....................
Zhejiang Dadongwu Greenhome
Wood Co., Ltd .........................
Zheijiang Fudeli Timber Industry
Co., Ltd ...................................
Zhejiang Fuma Warm Technology Co., Ltd ........................
Zhejiang Longsen Lumbering
Co., Ltd ...................................
Zhejiang Shiyou Timber Co., Ltd
Zhejiang Tianzhen Bamboo &
Wood Development Co., Ltd ..
83889
Weightedaverage
dumping
margin
(percent)
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
Cash Deposit Requirements
Because Senmao and the separate rate
companies have superseding cash
3.92 deposit rates, i.e. , there have been final
results published in a subsequent
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
3.92
12 Imports of subject merchandise from the
following are excluded: Produced and exported by
Fine Furniture (Shanghai) Limited (Fine Furniture)
and Double F Limited; produced and exported by
Armstrong Wood Products (Kunshan) Co., Ltd.
(Armstrong); and produced and exported by
Dunhua City Jisen Wood Industry Co., Ltd. (Dunhua
City Jisen).
13 Commerce inadvertently omitted this company
from the Second Remand Redetermination;
however, this company is entitled to the revised
rate as it was subject to the administrative review
and was a party to litigation.
14 Commerce inadvertently omitted this company
from the Second Remand Redetermination;
however, this company is entitled to the revised
rate as it was subject to the administrative review
and was a party to litigation.
15 Commerce inadvertently omitted this company
from the Second Remand Redetermination;
however, this company is entitled to the revised
rate as it was subject to the administrative review
and was a party to litigation.
E:\FR\FM\23DEN1.SGM
23DEN1
83890
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 23, 2020 / Notices
administrative review, this notice will
not affect the current cash deposit rates.
Liquidation of Suspended Entries
If the Court’s final judgment is not
appealed, or if appealed and upheld,
Commerce will instruct CBP to
terminate the suspension of liquidation,
and to liquidate and to assess duties at
a rate of 3.92 percent for entries during
the POR that were exported by the
companies listed above.
On April 10, 2019, for Armstrong, and
on July 24, 2020 and September 9, 2020,
respectively, for Dunhua City Jisen and
Fine Furniture, pursuant to Court order
lifting the injunctions Commerce issued
liquidation instructions to CBP
instructing CBP to liquidate entries for
the 2012–2013 POR without regard to
duties given these companies’ exclusion
from the order.
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: December 17, 2020.
Joseph A. Laroski Jr.,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and
Negotiations.
[FR Doc. 2020–28400 Filed 12–21–20; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–996, A–428–843, A–588–872, A–580–
872, A–401–809, A–583–851, C–570–997, C–
583–852]
Non-Oriented Electrical Steel From
People’s Republic of China, Germany,
Japan, Republic of Korea, Sweden, and
Taiwan: Continuation of Antidumping
Duty and Countervailing Duty Orders
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: As a result of the
determinations by the Department of
Commerce (Commerce) and the
International Trade Commission (ITC)
that revocation of the antidumping duty
(AD) orders on non-oriented electrical
steel (NOES) from People’s Republic of
China (China), Germany, Japan,
Republic of Korea (Korea), Sweden, and
Taiwan and revocation of the
countervailing duty (CVD) orders on
NOES from China and Taiwan would
likely lead to a continuation or
recurrence of dumping, countervailable
subsidies, and material injury to an
industry in the United States,
Commerce is publishing a notice of
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:21 Dec 22, 2020
Jkt 253001
continuation of these AD and CVD
orders.
DATES: Applicable December 23, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Abdul Alnoor, Eva Kim, or Paola
Aleman Ordaz, AD/CVD Operations,
Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4554,
(202) 482–8283, or (202) 482–4031,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On December 3, 2014, Commerce
published in the Federal Register the
notice of the AD orders on NOES from
China, Germany, Japan, Korea, Sweden,
and Taiwan 1 and the notice of the CVD
orders on NOES from China and
Taiwan.2 On November 1, 2019,
Commerce published the initiation of
the first sunset reviews of the Orders,
pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).3
Commerce conducted these sunset
reviews on an expedited basis, pursuant
to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), because we
received a complete, timely, and
adequate response from a domestic
interested party but no substantive
responses from respondent interested
parties.4 As a result of Commerce’s
review, Commerce determined pursuant
1 See Non-Oriented Electrical Steel From the
People’s Republic of China, Germany, Japan, the
Republic of Korea, Sweden, and Taiwan:
Antidumping Duty Orders, 79 FR 71741 (December
3, 2014) (AD Orders).
2 See Non-Oriented Electrical Steel From the
People’s Republic of China and Taiwan:
Countervailing Duty Orders, 79 FR 71749
(December 3, 2014) (CVD Orders) (collectively,
Orders).
3 See Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) Reviews, 84
FR 58687 (November 1, 2019).
4 See Domestic Interested Party’s Substantive
Responses, ‘‘Five Year (‘Sunset’) Review of
Antidumping Duty Order on Non-Oriented
Electrical Steel From the People’s Republic of
China: Domestic Interested Party Substantive
Response,’’ dated November 27, 2019; ‘‘Five Year
(‘Sunset’) Review Of Antidumping Duty Order On
Non-Oriented Electrical Steel From Germany:
Domestic Interested Party Substantive Response,’’
dated November 27, 2019; ‘‘Five-Year (‘Sunset’)
Review Of Antidumping Duty Order On NonOriented Electrical Steel From The Republic of
Korea: Domestic Interested Party Substantive
Response,’’ dated November 27, 2019; ‘‘Five-Year
(‘Sunset’) Review Of Antidumping Duty Order On
Non-Oriented Electrical Steel From Japan: Domestic
Interested Party Substantive Response,’’ dated
November 27, 2019; ‘‘Five Year (‘Sunset’) Review
Of Antidumping Duty Order On Non-Oriented
Electrical Steel From Sweden: Domestic Interested
Party Substantive Response,’’ dated November 27,
2019; ‘‘Five Year (‘Sunset’) Review of Antidumping
Duty Order on Non-Oriented Electrical Steel From
Taiwan: Domestic Interested Party Substantive
Response,’’ dated November 27, 2019.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
to sections 751(c)(1) and 752(c) of the
Act, that revocation of the AD Orders
would likely lead to a continuation or
recurrence of dumping. Commerce also
notified the ITC of the magnitude of the
dumping margins likely to prevail
should the AD Orders be revoked.5
Commerce also determined, pursuant to
sections 751(c)(1) and 752(b) of the Act,
that revocation of the CVD Orders on
NOES from China and Taiwan would be
likely to lead to the continuation or
recurrence of countervailable subsidies
and notified the ITC of the magnitude of
the subsidy rates likely to prevail
should the CVD Orders be revoked.6 On
December 16, 2020, the ITC published
notice of its determination, pursuant to
section 751(c) of the Act, that revocation
of the Orders would be likely to lead to
continuation or recurrence of material
injury to an industry in the United
States within a reasonably foreseeable
time.7
Scope of the Orders
The merchandise subject to the
Orders consists of non-oriented
electrical steel (NOES), which includes
cold-rolled, flat-rolled, alloy steel
products, whether or not in coils,
regardless of width, having an actual
thickness of 0.20 mm or more, in which
the core loss is substantially equal in
any direction of magnetization in the
plane of the material. The term
‘‘substantially equal’’ means that the
cross-grain direction of core loss is no
more than 1.5 times the straight grain
direction (i.e., the rolling direction) of
core loss. NOES has a magnetic
permeability that does not exceed 1.65
Tesla when tested at a field of 800 A/
m (equivalent to 10 Oersteds) along (i.e.,
parallel to) the rolling direction of the
sheet (i.e., B800 value). NOES contains
by weight more than 1.00 percent of
silicon but less than 3.5 percent of
silicon, not more than 0.08 percent of
carbon, and not more than 1.5 percent
of aluminum. NOES has a surface oxide
coating, to which an insulation coating
may be applied.
5 See Non-Oriented Electrical Steel From People’s
Republic of China, Germany, Japan, Republic of
Korea, Sweden, and Taiwan: Final Results of
Expedited First Sunset Reviews of Antidumping
Duty Orders, 85 FR 11337 (February 27, 2020)
(Final Results).
6 See Non-Oriented Electrical Steel From the
People’s Republic of China: Final Results of the
Expedited First Sunset Review of the Countervailing
Duty Order, 85 FR 11339 (February 27, 2020); NonOriented Electrical Steel From Taiwan: Final
Results of the Expedited Five-Year Sunset Review
of the Countervailing Duty Order, 85 FR 13135
(March 6, 2020).
7 See Non-Oriented Electrical Steel from China,
Germany, Japan, Korea, Sweden, and Taiwan,
(Investigation Nos. 701–TA–506 and 508 and 731–
TA–1238–1243), 85 FR 81486, (December 16, 2020).
E:\FR\FM\23DEN1.SGM
23DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 23, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 83888-83890]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28400]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
INTERNATIONAL TRADE ADMINISTRATION
[A-570-970]
Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China:
Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Results of the
Second Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 10, 2020, the United States Court of International
Trade (the Court) entered final judgment sustaining the final results
of the second remand redetermination pursuant to court order by the
Department of Commerce (Commerce) pertaining to the antidumping duty
administrative review of multilayered wood flooring (MLWF) from the
People's Republic of China (China) covering the period of review (POR),
December 1, 2012 through November 30, 2013. Commerce is notifying the
public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with
Commerce's final results in the 2012-2013 administrative review of MLWF
from China.
DATES: Applicable December 20, 2020
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aleksandras Nakutis, Office IV,
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC,
20230; telephone: (202) 482-3147.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On July 15, 2015, Commerce published the Final Results in the 2012-
2013 administrative review of multilayered wood flooring from China in
which Commerce assigned a rate of 13.74 percent to Jiangsu Senmao
Bamboo and Wood Industry Co., Ltd. (Senmao) and all separate rate
respondents in the Final Results.\1\ Commerce applied the weighted-
average dumping margin of Senmao (the only mandatory respondent to
receive a rate that was not de minimis or based solely on adverse facts
available) to all parties eligible for a separate rate, pursuant to
section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and
Final Results of New Shipper Review; 2012-2013, 80 FR 41476 (July
15, 2015) (Final Results).
\2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senmao and certain separate rate respondents appealed the Final
Results. In its first remand order, the Court directed Commerce to
reconsider or further explain certain of its surrogate value
selections, its downward adjustment for irrevocable VAT, as well as its
decision to deny voluntary respondent status to Fine Furniture
(Shanghai) Limited (Fine Furniture).\3\ Upon reconsidering these issues
in the First Remand Redetermination, Commerce made certain changes and
calculated a revised weighted-average dumping margin for Senmao and the
separate rate companies.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co., Ltd., et
al. , v. United States, 322 F. Supp 3d 1308 (CIT 2018) (Senmao I).
\4\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Order, Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co., Ltd., et al. ,
v. United States, dated June 3, 2019 (First Remand Redetermination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Senmao II, the Court affirmed the First Remand Redetermination
as it pertained to the surrogate value selections.\5\ However, the
Court found that Commerce's downward adjustment for irrevocable VAT was
contrary to law in relying upon an unlawful interpretation of the
Act.\6\ The Court,
[[Page 83889]]
thus, remanded the case, so that Commerce could correct the error
regarding the downward adjustment for irrevocable VAT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co., Ltd., et
al., v. United States, Court No. 15-00225. Slip Op. 20-31 (March 11,
2020) (Senmao II).
\6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Second Remand Redetermination,\7\ Commerce removed the
downward adjustment for irrevocable VAT as directed by the Court and
revised the weighted-average dumping margin for Senmao to 3.92
percent.\8\ Additionally, because the rate for separate rate
respondents was based entirely on Senmao's weighted-average dumping
margin, Senmao's margin of 3.92 percent was applied to those separate
rate respondents which were party to the litigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Order, Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co., Ltd., et al., v.
United States, dated May 8, 2020 (Second Remand Redetermination).
\8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On December 10, 2020, the Court entered final judgment in Senmao
III.\9\ The Court sustained the Second Remand Redetermination excluding
any downward adjustment for irrevocable VAT and revising the weighted-
average dumping margin for Senmao and the other separate rate entities
that are party to the litigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co., Ltd., et
al. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 19-00225 (Senmao III). In
Senmao III, the Court did not address a previous issue concerning
Fine Furniture. However, on September 9, 2020, the Court granted
Fine Furniture's request to dissolve its injunction covering subject
entries during the POR, ECF No. 174, because Fine Furniture and
Double F Limited are excluded from the order and no party sought
appeal of Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co. v. United States, 947 F.3d 781
(Fed Cir. 2020) (affirming Fine Furniture and Double F Limited's
exclusion from the order). Accordingly, because Fine Furniture and
Double F Limited are excluded from the order, the issue regarding
Fine Furniture is moot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, the
CAFC held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Act, Commerce must
publish a notice of a court decision that is not ``in harmony'' with
Commerce's determination and must suspend liquidation of entries
pending a ``conclusive'' court decision. The Court's December 10, 2020
final judgment affirming the Second Remand Redetermination \10\
constitutes a final decision of the Court that is not in harmony with
the Final Results.\11\ This notice is published in fulfillment of the
publication requirements of Timken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Id.
\11\ See Final Results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Final Determination
There is now a final court decision with respect to the Final
Results with respect to the irrevocable VAT adjustment. Accordingly,
Commerce is amending the Final Results and assigning the revised
weighted-average dumping margin for Senmao and the separate rate
respondents which are parties to the litigation. Additionally, Commerce
is amending the revised weighted-average dumping margins for these
companies as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Exporter \12\ dumping
margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co., Ltd............ 3.92
Baishan Huafeng Wooden Product Co., Ltd., (aka Baishan 3.92
Huafeng Wood Product Co., Ltd.)............................
Changbai Mountain Development and Protection Zone Hongtu 3.92
Wood Industrial Co., Ltd...................................
Chinafloors Timber (China) Co., Ltd......................... 3.92
Dalian Kemian Wood Industry Co., Ltd........................ 3.92
Dalian Penghong Floor Products Co., Ltd..................... 3.92
Dalien Qianqiu Wooden Product Co., Ltd...................... 3.92
Dasso Industrial Group Co., Ltd............................. 3.92
Dongtai Fuan Universal Dynamics, LLC........................ 3.92
Dunhua City Hongyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd................. 3.92
Dun Hua Sen Tai Wood Co., Ltd............................... 3.92
Dunhua City Wanrong Wood Industry Co., Ltd.................. 3.92
Fusong Jinlong Wooden Group Co., Ltd........................ 3.92
Fusong Jinqiu Wooden Product Co., Ltd....................... 3.92
Fusong Qianqiu Wooden Product Co., Ltd...................... 3.92
Guangdong Yihua Timber Industry Co., Ltd.................... 3.92
Guangzhou Panyu Kangda Board Co., Ltd....................... 3.92
HaiLin LinJing Wooden Products, Ltd......................... 3.92
Hangzhou Hanje Tec Co., Ltd................................. 3.92
Hangzhou Zhengtian Industrial Co., Ltd...................... 3.92
Hunchun Forest Wolf Wooden Industry Co., Ltd................ 3.92
Huzhou Chenghang Wood Co., Ltd.............................. 3.92
Huzhou Fulinmen Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd........................ 3.92
Jiafeng Wood (Suzhou) Co., Ltd.............................. 3.92
Jiangsu Guyu International Trading Co., Ltd................. 3.92
Jiangsu Kentier Wood Co., Ltd............................... 3.92
Jiangsu Mingle Flooring Co., Ltd.\13\....................... 3.92
Jiangsu Simba Flooring Co., Ltd.\14\........................ 3.92
Jiashan HuiJiale Decoration Material Co., Ltd............... 3.92
Jilin Forest Industry Jinqiao Flooring Group Co., Ltd....... 3.92
Kemian Wood Industry (Kunshan) Co., Ltd..................... 3.92
Metropolitan Hardwood Floors, Inc........................... 3.92
Mudanjiang Bosen Wood Industry Co., Ltd..................... 3.92
Nakahiro Jyou Sei Furniture (Dalian) Co., Ltd............... 3.92
Nanjing Minglin Wooden Industry Co., Ltd.................... 3.92
Puli Trading Limited........................................ 3.92
Shanghai Eswell Timber Co., Ltd............................. 3.92
Shanghai Shenlin Corp....................................... 3.92
Shanghai Lizhong Wood Products Co., Ltd./The Lizhong Wood 3.92
Industry Limited Company of Shanghai/Linyi Youyou Wood Co.,
Ltd........................................................
Shenyang Haobainian Wooden Co., Ltd......................... 3.92
Shenzhenshi Huanwei Woods Co., Ltd.......................... 3.92
Suzhou Dongda Wood Co., Ltd.\15\............................ 3.92
Tongxiang Jisheng Import and Export Co., Ltd................ 3.92
Xuzhou Shenghe Wood Co., Ltd................................ 3.92
Yingyi-Nature (Kunshan) Wood Industry Co., Ltd.............. 3.92
Zhejiang Dadongwu Greenhome Wood Co., Ltd................... 3.92
Zheijiang Fudeli Timber Industry Co., Ltd................... 3.92
Zhejiang Fuma Warm Technology Co., Ltd...................... 3.92
Zhejiang Longsen Lumbering Co., Ltd......................... 3.92
Zhejiang Shiyou Timber Co., Ltd............................. 3.92
Zhejiang Tianzhen Bamboo & Wood Development Co., Ltd........ 3.92
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Imports of subject merchandise from the following are
excluded: Produced and exported by Fine Furniture (Shanghai) Limited
(Fine Furniture) and Double F Limited; produced and exported by
Armstrong Wood Products (Kunshan) Co., Ltd. (Armstrong); and
produced and exported by Dunhua City Jisen Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
(Dunhua City Jisen).
\13\ Commerce inadvertently omitted this company from the Second
Remand Redetermination; however, this company is entitled to the
revised rate as it was subject to the administrative review and was
a party to litigation.
\14\ Commerce inadvertently omitted this company from the Second
Remand Redetermination; however, this company is entitled to the
revised rate as it was subject to the administrative review and was
a party to litigation.
\15\ Commerce inadvertently omitted this company from the Second
Remand Redetermination; however, this company is entitled to the
revised rate as it was subject to the administrative review and was
a party to litigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because Senmao and the separate rate companies have superseding
cash deposit rates, i.e. , there have been final results published in a
subsequent
[[Page 83890]]
administrative review, this notice will not affect the current cash
deposit rates.
Liquidation of Suspended Entries
If the Court's final judgment is not appealed, or if appealed and
upheld, Commerce will instruct CBP to terminate the suspension of
liquidation, and to liquidate and to assess duties at a rate of 3.92
percent for entries during the POR that were exported by the companies
listed above.
On April 10, 2019, for Armstrong, and on July 24, 2020 and
September 9, 2020, respectively, for Dunhua City Jisen and Fine
Furniture, pursuant to Court order lifting the injunctions Commerce
issued liquidation instructions to CBP instructing CBP to liquidate
entries for the 2012-2013 POR without regard to duties given these
companies' exclusion from the order.
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: December 17, 2020.
Joseph A. Laroski Jr.,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations.
[FR Doc. 2020-28400 Filed 12-21-20; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
