Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results, 14628-14630 [2024-04074]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
14628
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 2024 / Notices
may listen to the meetings. At the
meetings, an open comment period will
be provided to allow members of the
public to make a statement as time
allows. Per the Federal Advisory
Committee Act, public minutes of the
meetings will include a list of persons
who are present at the meetings. If
joining via phone, callers can expect to
incur regular charges for calls they
initiate over wireless lines, according to
their wireless plan. The Commission
will not refund any incurred charges.
Callers will incur no charge for calls
they initiate over land-line connections
to the toll-free telephone number.
Closed captioning will be available for
individuals who are deaf, hard of
hearing, or who have certain cognitive
or learning impairments. To request
additional accommodations, please
email ebohor@usccr.gov at least 10
business days prior to the meetings.
Members of the public are entitled to
submit written comments; the
comments must be received in the
regional office within 30 days following
the meetings. Written comments may be
emailed to Barbara Delaviez at
bdelaviez@usccr.gov. Persons who
desire additional information may
contact the Regional Programs
Coordination Unit at 1–312–353–8311.
Records generated from these
meetings may be inspected and
reproduced at the Regional Programs
Coordination Unit Office, as they
become available, both before and after
the meetings. Records of meetings will
be available via www.facadatabase.gov
under the Commission on Civil Rights,
Colorado Advisory Committee link.
Persons interested in the work of this
Committee are directed to the
Commission’s website, https://
www.usccr.gov, or may contact the
Regional Programs Coordination Unit at
ebohor@usccr.gov.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
I. Welcome and Roll Call
II. Report Stage: Public School
Attendance Zones
III. Discuss Next Steps
IV. Public Comment
V. Adjournment
Dated: February 23, 2024.
David Mussatt,
Supervisory Chief, Regional Programs Unit.
BILLING CODE P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:59 Feb 27, 2024
Jkt 262001
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 Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; Notice of
Amended Final Results
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On February 8, 2024, the U.S.
Court of International Trade (CIT)
issued its final judgment in American
Manufacturers of Multilayered Wood
Flooring v. United States, Court No. 21–
00595, Slip Op. 24–13 (CIT February 8,
2024), sustaining the U.S. Department of
Commerce’s (Commerce) remand results
pertaining to the administrative review
of the antidumping duty (AD) order on
multilayered wood flooring (MLWF)
from the People’s Republic of China
(China) covering the period December 1,
2018, through November 30, 2019.
Commerce is notifying the public that
the CIT’s final judgment is not in
harmony with Commerce’s final results
of the administrative review, and that
Commerce is amending the final results
with respect to the dumping margin
assigned to certain non-individuallyexamined companies.
DATES: Applicable February 18, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Williams, AD/CVD Operations,
Office VIII, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482–4338.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On February 6, 2020, Commerce
published the notice of initiation of the
2018–2019 AD administrative review of
the Order.1 Commerce subsequently
received a separate rate certification
(SRC) from Dalian Qianqiu Wooden
Product Co., Ltd., Fusong Jinlong
Wooden Group Co., Ltd., Fusong Jinqiu
Wooden Product Co., Ltd., and Fusong
Qianqiu Wooden Products Co., Ltd.
Agenda for Both Meeting Dates
[FR Doc. 2024–04120 Filed 2–27–24; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
1 See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 85 FR
6896 (February 6, 2020) (Initiation Notice); see also
Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People’s
Republic of China: Amended Final Determination
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping
Duty Order, 76 FR 76690 (December 8, 2011)
(Order).
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(collectively, Jinlong),2 among other
companies. Commerce selected Jinlong
and Senmao Bamboo and Wood
Industry Co., Ltd. (Senmao) as
mandatory respondents and issued AD
questionnaires to both companies.3 On
April 14, 2020, Jinlong notified
Commerce that it did not intend to
participate in the administrative
review.4
On October 29, 2021, Commerce
published its Final Results, in which
Commerce determined that Jinlong did
not establish eligibility for a separate
rate because it failed to respond to
Section A of Commerce’s AD
questionnaire, which included
questions relevant to demonstrating
eligibility for a separate rate.5 Although
Jinlong submitted an SRC on the record,
Commerce explained that, consistent
with its Initiation Notice and prior
practice, companies that file SRCs and
are later selected as mandatory
respondents are not considered eligible
for a separate rate unless they respond
to the AD questionnaire.6 In denying
Jinlong a separate rate, Commerce found
that Jinlong was part of the China-wide
entity which was subject to a weightedaverage dumping margin of 85.13
percent. Commerce calculated a zero
percent weighted-average dumping
margin for Senmao.7 Commerce
assigned a zero percent weightedaverage dumping margin to each of the
separate-rate companies not
individually examined in the review.
The American Manufacturers of
Multilayered Wood Flooring (AMMWF)
appealed Commerce’s Final Results. On
March 21, 2023, the CIT remanded the
Final Results to Commerce, directing
Commerce to reconsider whether
Jinlong was eligible for a separate rate
based on its SRC, notwithstanding its
failure to respond to Commerce’s AD
questionnaire.8 The CIT held that,
2 See Jinlong’s Letter, ‘‘Separate Rate
Certification,’’ dated March 9, 2020.
3 See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the
People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of
the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,
Preliminary Determination of No Shipments,
Preliminary Successor in-Interest Determination,
and Rescission of Review, in Part; 2018–2019, 86 FR
22016 (April 26, 2021), and accompanying
Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
4 See Jinlong’s Letter, ‘‘Jinlong Notice of Intent
Not to Participate,’’ dated April 14, 2020.
5 See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the
People’s Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Final
Determination of No Shipments, and Partial
Rescission; 2018–2019, 86 FR 59987 (October 29,
2021) (Final Results), and accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum at Comment 1.
6 Id.
7 See Final Results, 86 FR at 59988.
8 See American Manufacturers of Multilayered
Wood Flooring v. United States, Court No. 21–
00595 (March 21, 2023).
E:\FR\FM\28FEN1.SGM
28FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 2024 / Notices
because Commerce accepted SRCs for
other non-individually examined
respondents as sufficient evidence to
grant separate rates, this disparate
treatment of respondents who appear to
be similarly situated is arbitrary and
capricious.9
In its final remand redetermination,
issued in August 2023, Commerce (1)
evaluated Jinlong’s eligibility for a
separate rate based on its SRC and
assigned Jinlong a weighted-average
dumping margin based on adverse facts
available (AFA) in accordance with
sections 776(a) and (b) of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the Act), because
Jinlong did not cooperate to the best of
its ability by failing to respond to the
AD questionnaire; and (2) recalculated
the dumping margin assigned to the
eligible separate-rate companies not
selected for individual examination.10
Commerce assigned the simple average
of Jinlong’s AFA-based margin and
Senmao’s zero percent margin (i.e.,
42.57 percent) to eligible separate-rate
companies.12 The CIT sustained
Commerce’s final redetermination.11
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,12 as
clarified by Diamond Sawblades,13 the
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
held that, pursuant to sections 516A(c)
and (e) of the Act, Commerce must
publish a notice of court decision that
is not ‘‘in harmony’’ with a Commerce
determination and must suspend
liquidation of entries pending a
‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The CIT’s
February 8, 2024, judgment constitutes
a final decision of the CIT that is not in
harmony with Commerce’s Final
Results. Thus, this notice is published
in fulfillment of the publication
requirements of Timken.
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court
judgment, Commerce is amending its
Final Results with respect to the eligible
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
9 Id.
10 As explained in the final remand
redetermination, we determined Jinlong is eligible
for a separate rate ‘‘for the sole purpose of
calculating the rate for the separate rate respondents
that have entries enjoined for this period of review
because Jinlong is not a party to this litigation and
does not have entries enjoined for this period of
review.’’ See Final Results of Remand
Redetermination, American Manufacturers of
Multilayered Wood Flooring v. United States, CIT
Court No. 21–00595, dated August 8, 2023.
11 See American Manufacturers of Multilayered
Wood Flooring v. United States, Slip Op. 24–13,
dated February 8, 2024.
12 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337
(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken).
13 See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers
Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir.
2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:59 Feb 27, 2024
Jkt 262001
separate-rate companies not selected for
individual examination as follows:
Dumping
margin
(percent)
Exporter
42.57
Cash Deposit Requirements
Because certain separate rate
respondents have a superseding cash
deposit rate, i.e., there have been final
results published in a subsequent
administrative review, Commerce will
not issue revised cash deposit
instructions to U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) for those companies.
However, Commerce will issue revised
cash deposit instructions to CBP for the
separate rate respondents that do not
have a superseding cash deposit rate.15
Liquidation of Suspended Entries
At this time, Commerce remains
enjoined by CIT order from liquidating
entries that were exported by the nonindividually-examined separate rate
respondents 16 and were entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption during the period
December 1, 2018, through November
30, 2019. These entries will remain
enjoined pursuant to the terms of the
injunction during the pendency of any
appeals process.
In the event the CIT’s ruling is not
appealed, or, if appealed, upheld by a
final and conclusive court decision,
Commerce intends to instruct CBP to
assess antidumping duties on
unliquidated entries of subject
merchandise exported by the nonindividually examined separate rate
respondents in accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(b), where appropriate. We will
instruct CBP to assess antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries covered
by this review at the AD rate noted in
the table above.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(c) and
(e) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Appendix II for a list of these companies.
Appendix I.
16 See Appendix II.
15 See
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: February 20, 2024.
Ryan Majerus,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and
Negotiations, performing the non-exclusive
functions and duties of the Assistant
Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix I
Non-Individually-Examined Companies 14 ..................................
14 See
14629
Non-Individually-Examined Companies
Receiving a Separate Rate
Arte Mundi (Shanghai) Aesthetic Home
Furnishings Co., Ltd. (successor-ininterest to Scholar Home (Shanghai)
New Material Co., Ltd.)
Dalian Jiahong Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
Dongtai Fuan Universal Dynamics, LLC
Dunhua City Hongyuan Wood Industry
Co., Ltd.
Hailin Linjing Wooden Products Co.,
Ltd.
Hunchun Xingjia Wooden Flooring Inc.
Huzhou Chenghang Wood Co., Ltd
Huzhou Sunergy World Trade Co., Ltd.
Jiangsu Keri Wood Co., Ltd.
Jiangsu Mingle Flooring Co., Ltd
Jiangsu Simba Flooring Co., Ltd.
Jiashan On-Line Lumber Co., Ltd.
Kingman Floors Co., Ltd.
Linyi Youyou Wood Co., Ltd.
Pinge Timber Manufacturing (Zhejiang)
Co., Ltd.
Sino-Maple (Jiangsu) Co., Ltd.
Suzhou Dongda Wood Co., Ltd.
Tongxiang Jisheng Import and Export
Co., Ltd.
Zhejiang Longsen Lumbering Co., Ltd
Appendix II
Companies Subject to Injunction
A&W (Shanghai) Woods Co., Ltd.
Arte Mundi (Shanghai) Aesthetic Home
Furnishings Co., Ltd. (successor-ininterest to Scholar Home (Shanghai)
New Material Co., Ltd.)
Benxi Wood Company
Dalian Jiahong Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
Dalian Kemian Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
Dalian Penghong Floor Products Co.,
Ltd./Dalian Shumaike Floor
Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
Dongtai Fuan Universal Dynamics, LLC
Dun Hua Sen Tai Wood Co., Ltd.
Dunhua City Hongyuan Wood Industry
Co., Ltd.
Dunhua Shengda Wood Industry Co.,
Ltd
Hailin Linjing Wooden Products Co.,
Ltd.
Hunchun Xingjia Wooden Flooring Inc.
Huzhou Chenghang Wood Co., Ltd.
Huzhou Fulinmen Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd.
Huzhou Jesonwood Co., Ltd.
Huzhou Sunergy World Trade Co., Ltd
Jiangsu Guyu International Trading Co.,
Ltd
Jiangsu Keri Wood Co., Ltd
Jiangsu Mingle Flooring Co., Ltd.
Jiangsu Simba Flooring Co., Ltd.
E:\FR\FM\28FEN1.SGM
28FEN1
14630
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 2024 / Notices
Jiashan HuiJiaLe Decoration Material
Co., Ltd
Jiashan On-Line Lumber Co., Ltd.
Jiaxing Hengtong Wood Co., Ltd
Kemian Wood Industry (Kunshan) Co.,
Ltd.
Kingman Floors Co., Ltd.
Linyi Youyou Wood Co., Ltd.
Metropolitan Hardwood Floors, Inc.
Pinge Timber Manufacturing (Zhejiang)
Co., Ltd.
Sino-Maple (Jiangsu) Co., Ltd
Suzhou Dongda Wood Co., Ltd.
Tongxiang Jisheng Import and Export
Co., Ltd.
Yihua Lifestyle Technology Co., Ltd.
(successor-in-interest to Guangdong
Yihua Timber Industry Co., Ltd.)
Zhejiang Dadongwu Greenhome Wood
Co., Ltd.
Zhejiang Fuerjia Wooden Co., Ltd
Zhejiang Longsen Lumbering Co., Ltd.
[FR Doc. 2024–04074 Filed 2–27–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[Application No. 90–9A007]
Export Trade Certificate of Review
Notice of application for an
amended Export Trade Certificate of
Review for the United States Surimi
Commission, Application No. 90–
9A007.
ACTION:
The Secretary of Commerce,
through the Office of Trade and
Economic Analysis (OTEA) of the
International Trade Administration, has
received an application for an amended
Export Trade Certificate of Review
(Certificate). This notice summarizes the
proposed application and seeks public
comments on whether the Certificate
should be issued.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joseph Flynn, Director, OTEA,
International Trade Administration,
(202) 482–5131 (this is not a toll-free
number) or email at etca@trade.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title III of
the Export Trading Company Act of
1982 (15 U.S.C. 4011–21) authorizes the
Secretary of Commerce to issue Export
Trade Certificates of Review. An Export
Trade Certificate of Review protects the
holder and the members identified in
the Certificate from State and Federal
government antitrust actions and from
private treble damage antitrust actions
for the export conduct specified in the
Certificate and carried out in
compliance with its terms and
conditions. The regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:59 Feb 27, 2024
Jkt 262001
implementing Title III are found at 15
CFR part 325. OTEA is issuing this
notice pursuant to 15 CFR 325.6(a),
which requires the Secretary of
Commerce to publish a summary of the
application in the Federal Register,
identifying the applicant and each
member and summarizing the proposed
export conduct.
Request for Public Comments
Interested parties may submit written
comments relevant to the determination
whether a Certificate should be issued.
If the comments include any privileged
or confidential business information, it
must be clearly marked and a
nonconfidential version of the
comments (identified as such) should be
included. Any comments not marked as
privileged or confidential business
information will be deemed to be
nonconfidential.
Written comments should be sent to
ETCA@trade.gov. An original and two
(2) copies should also be submitted no
later than 20 days after the date of this
notice to: Office of Trade and Economic
Analysis, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Room 21028, Washington,
DC 20230.
Information submitted by any person
is exempt from disclosure under the
Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C.
552). However, nonconfidential versions
of the comments will be made available
to the applicant if necessary for
determining whether or not to issue the
Certificate. Comments should refer to
this application as ‘‘Export Trade
Certificate of Review, application
number No. 90–9A007.’’
Summary of the Application
Applicant: United States Surimi
Commission, c/o Mundt MacGregor
L.L.P., 271 Wyatt Way NE, Suite 106,
Bainbridge Island, Washington USA
98110.
Contact: Duncan R. McIntosh,
Attorney at Law, Mundt MacGregor
L.L.P.
Application No.: 90–9A007.
Date Deemed Submitted: February 13,
2024.
Proposed Amendment: United States
Surimi Commission seeks to amend its
Certificate as follows:
1. Add the following entities as
Members of the Certificate within the
meaning of section 325.2(l) of the
Regulations (15 CFR 325.2(l)):
• Arctic Fjord II LLC
• Arctic Storm Holding Company LLC
• Coastal Alaska Premier Seafoods, LLC
• F/V Neahkahnie LLC
• Fishery Investments, Ltd.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• Phoenix Processor Limited
Partnership
2. Remove the following companies as
Members of the Certificate:
• AF International, Inc.
• Aleutian Spray Fisheries, Inc
• Fjord Seafoods LLC
• Fjord Fisheries General Partnership
• NWPI, Inc.
• Starbound LLC
United States Surimi Commission’s
proposed amendment of its Certificate
would result in the following
Membership list:
1. American Seafoods Company LLC,
Seattle, WA
2. American Seafoods Japan, Ltd.,
Seattle, WA
3. AS Europe ApS, Seattle, WA
4. American Seafoods China (Dalian)
Ltd., Seattle, WA
5. Arctic Storm, Inc., Seattle, WA
6. Arctic Storm International, Inc.,
Seattle, WA
7. Arctic Fjord, Inc., Seattle, WA
8. Arctic Fjord II LLC, Seattle, WA
9. F/V Neahkahnie LLC, Seattle, WA
10. Arctic Storm Management Group
LLC, Seattle, WA
11. Arctic Storm Holding Company LLC,
Seattle, WA
12. Glacier Fish Company LLC, Seattle,
WA
13. ASM Export Co., Seattle, WA
14. Coastal Alaska Premier Seafoods,
LLC, Anchorage, AK
15. Phoenix Processor Limited
Partnership, Seattle, WA
16. Fishery Investments, Ltd., Seattle,
WA
Dated: February 23, 2024.
Joseph Flynn,
Director, Office of Trade and Economic
Analysis, International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce.
[FR Doc. 2024–04083 Filed 2–27–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–909]
Certain Steel Nails From the People’s
Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review and Determination of No
Shipments; 2021–2022
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of
Commerce (Commerce) determines that
Shanghai Yueda Nails Co., Ltd., a.k.a.
Shanghai Yueda Nails Industry Co., Ltd.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\28FEN1.SGM
28FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 40 (Wednesday, February 28, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14628-14630]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-04074]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On February 8, 2024, the U.S. Court of International Trade
(CIT) issued its final judgment in American Manufacturers of
Multilayered Wood Flooring v. United States, Court No. 21-00595, Slip
Op. 24-13 (CIT February 8, 2024), sustaining the U.S. Department of
Commerce's (Commerce) remand results pertaining to the administrative
review of the antidumping duty (AD) order on multilayered wood flooring
(MLWF) from the People's Republic of China (China) covering the period
December 1, 2018, through November 30, 2019. Commerce is notifying the
public that the CIT's final judgment is not in harmony with Commerce's
final results of the administrative review, and that Commerce is
amending the final results with respect to the dumping margin assigned
to certain non-individually-examined companies.
DATES: Applicable February 18, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Williams, AD/CVD Operations,
Office VIII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4338.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On February 6, 2020, Commerce published the notice of initiation of
the 2018-2019 AD administrative review of the Order.\1\ Commerce
subsequently received a separate rate certification (SRC) from Dalian
Qianqiu Wooden Product Co., Ltd., Fusong Jinlong Wooden Group Co.,
Ltd., Fusong Jinqiu Wooden Product Co., Ltd., and Fusong Qianqiu Wooden
Products Co., Ltd. (collectively, Jinlong),\2\ among other companies.
Commerce selected Jinlong and Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
(Senmao) as mandatory respondents and issued AD questionnaires to both
companies.\3\ On April 14, 2020, Jinlong notified Commerce that it did
not intend to participate in the administrative review.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews, 85 FR 6896 (February 6, 2020) (Initiation
Notice); see also Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's
Republic of China: Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order, 76 FR 76690 (December 8,
2011) (Order).
\2\ See Jinlong's Letter, ``Separate Rate Certification,'' dated
March 9, 2020.
\3\ See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of
China: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, Preliminary Determination of No Shipments, Preliminary
Successor in-Interest Determination, and Rescission of Review, in
Part; 2018-2019, 86 FR 22016 (April 26, 2021), and accompanying
Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
\4\ See Jinlong's Letter, ``Jinlong Notice of Intent Not to
Participate,'' dated April 14, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 29, 2021, Commerce published its Final Results, in which
Commerce determined that Jinlong did not establish eligibility for a
separate rate because it failed to respond to Section A of Commerce's
AD questionnaire, which included questions relevant to demonstrating
eligibility for a separate rate.\5\ Although Jinlong submitted an SRC
on the record, Commerce explained that, consistent with its Initiation
Notice and prior practice, companies that file SRCs and are later
selected as mandatory respondents are not considered eligible for a
separate rate unless they respond to the AD questionnaire.\6\ In
denying Jinlong a separate rate, Commerce found that Jinlong was part
of the China-wide entity which was subject to a weighted-average
dumping margin of 85.13 percent. Commerce calculated a zero percent
weighted-average dumping margin for Senmao.\7\ Commerce assigned a zero
percent weighted-average dumping margin to each of the separate-rate
companies not individually examined in the review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,
Final Determination of No Shipments, and Partial Rescission; 2018-
2019, 86 FR 59987 (October 29, 2021) (Final Results), and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 1.
\6\ Id.
\7\ See Final Results, 86 FR at 59988.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The American Manufacturers of Multilayered Wood Flooring (AMMWF)
appealed Commerce's Final Results. On March 21, 2023, the CIT remanded
the Final Results to Commerce, directing Commerce to reconsider whether
Jinlong was eligible for a separate rate based on its SRC,
notwithstanding its failure to respond to Commerce's AD
questionnaire.\8\ The CIT held that,
[[Page 14629]]
because Commerce accepted SRCs for other non-individually examined
respondents as sufficient evidence to grant separate rates, this
disparate treatment of respondents who appear to be similarly situated
is arbitrary and capricious.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See American Manufacturers of Multilayered Wood Flooring v.
United States, Court No. 21-00595 (March 21, 2023).
\9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its final remand redetermination, issued in August 2023,
Commerce (1) evaluated Jinlong's eligibility for a separate rate based
on its SRC and assigned Jinlong a weighted-average dumping margin based
on adverse facts available (AFA) in accordance with sections 776(a) and
(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), because Jinlong
did not cooperate to the best of its ability by failing to respond to
the AD questionnaire; and (2) recalculated the dumping margin assigned
to the eligible separate-rate companies not selected for individual
examination.\10\ Commerce assigned the simple average of Jinlong's AFA-
based margin and Senmao's zero percent margin (i.e., 42.57 percent) to
eligible separate-rate companies.\12\ The CIT sustained Commerce's
final redetermination.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ As explained in the final remand redetermination, we
determined Jinlong is eligible for a separate rate ``for the sole
purpose of calculating the rate for the separate rate respondents
that have entries enjoined for this period of review because Jinlong
is not a party to this litigation and does not have entries enjoined
for this period of review.'' See Final Results of Remand
Redetermination, American Manufacturers of Multilayered Wood
Flooring v. United States, CIT Court No. 21-00595, dated August 8,
2023.
\11\ See American Manufacturers of Multilayered Wood Flooring v.
United States, Slip Op. 24-13, dated February 8, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,\12\ as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades,\13\ the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that,
pursuant to sections 516A(c) and (e) of the Act, Commerce must publish
a notice of court decision that is not ``in harmony'' with a Commerce
determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a
``conclusive'' court decision. The CIT's February 8, 2024, judgment
constitutes a final decision of the CIT that is not in harmony with
Commerce's Final Results. Thus, this notice is published in fulfillment
of the publication requirements of Timken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken).
\13\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition v. United
States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court judgment, Commerce is amending
its Final Results with respect to the eligible separate-rate companies
not selected for individual examination as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dumping
Exporter margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Individually-Examined Companies \14\.................... 42.57
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements
Because certain separate rate respondents have a superseding cash
deposit rate, i.e., there have been final results published in a
subsequent administrative review, Commerce will not issue revised cash
deposit instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) for
those companies. However, Commerce will issue revised cash deposit
instructions to CBP for the separate rate respondents that do not have
a superseding cash deposit rate.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Appendix II for a list of these companies.
\15\ See Appendix I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Liquidation of Suspended Entries
At this time, Commerce remains enjoined by CIT order from
liquidating entries that were exported by the non-individually-examined
separate rate respondents \16\ and were entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption during the period December 1, 2018, through
November 30, 2019. These entries will remain enjoined pursuant to the
terms of the injunction during the pendency of any appeals process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Appendix II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the event the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or, if appealed,
upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce intends to
instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on unliquidated entries of
subject merchandise exported by the non-individually examined separate
rate respondents in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b), where
appropriate. We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries covered by this review at the AD rate noted in the
table above.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(c) and (e) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: February 20, 2024.
Ryan Majerus,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations, performing the
non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix I
Non-Individually-Examined Companies Receiving a Separate Rate
Arte Mundi (Shanghai) Aesthetic Home Furnishings Co., Ltd. (successor-
in-interest to Scholar Home (Shanghai) New Material Co., Ltd.)
Dalian Jiahong Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
Dongtai Fuan Universal Dynamics, LLC
Dunhua City Hongyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
Hailin Linjing Wooden Products Co., Ltd.
Hunchun Xingjia Wooden Flooring Inc.
Huzhou Chenghang Wood Co., Ltd
Huzhou Sunergy World Trade Co., Ltd.
Jiangsu Keri Wood Co., Ltd.
Jiangsu Mingle Flooring Co., Ltd
Jiangsu Simba Flooring Co., Ltd.
Jiashan On-Line Lumber Co., Ltd.
Kingman Floors Co., Ltd.
Linyi Youyou Wood Co., Ltd.
Pinge Timber Manufacturing (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd.
Sino-Maple (Jiangsu) Co., Ltd.
Suzhou Dongda Wood Co., Ltd.
Tongxiang Jisheng Import and Export Co., Ltd.
Zhejiang Longsen Lumbering Co., Ltd
Appendix II
Companies Subject to Injunction
A&W (Shanghai) Woods Co., Ltd.
Arte Mundi (Shanghai) Aesthetic Home Furnishings Co., Ltd. (successor-
in-interest to Scholar Home (Shanghai) New Material Co., Ltd.)
Benxi Wood Company
Dalian Jiahong Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
Dalian Kemian Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
Dalian Penghong Floor Products Co., Ltd./Dalian Shumaike Floor
Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
Dongtai Fuan Universal Dynamics, LLC
Dun Hua Sen Tai Wood Co., Ltd.
Dunhua City Hongyuan Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
Dunhua Shengda Wood Industry Co., Ltd
Hailin Linjing Wooden Products Co., Ltd.
Hunchun Xingjia Wooden Flooring Inc.
Huzhou Chenghang Wood Co., Ltd.
Huzhou Fulinmen Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd.
Huzhou Jesonwood Co., Ltd.
Huzhou Sunergy World Trade Co., Ltd
Jiangsu Guyu International Trading Co., Ltd
Jiangsu Keri Wood Co., Ltd
Jiangsu Mingle Flooring Co., Ltd.
Jiangsu Simba Flooring Co., Ltd.
[[Page 14630]]
Jiashan HuiJiaLe Decoration Material Co., Ltd
Jiashan On-Line Lumber Co., Ltd.
Jiaxing Hengtong Wood Co., Ltd
Kemian Wood Industry (Kunshan) Co., Ltd.
Kingman Floors Co., Ltd.
Linyi Youyou Wood Co., Ltd.
Metropolitan Hardwood Floors, Inc.
Pinge Timber Manufacturing (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd.
Sino-Maple (Jiangsu) Co., Ltd
Suzhou Dongda Wood Co., Ltd.
Tongxiang Jisheng Import and Export Co., Ltd.
Yihua Lifestyle Technology Co., Ltd. (successor-in-interest to
Guangdong Yihua Timber Industry Co., Ltd.)
Zhejiang Dadongwu Greenhome Wood Co., Ltd.
Zhejiang Fuerjia Wooden Co., Ltd
Zhejiang Longsen Lumbering Co., Ltd.
[FR Doc. 2024-04074 Filed 2-27-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
