International Trade Administration January 29, 2010 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate Products From Italy: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
In response to a request by an interested party, the Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain cut-to-length carbon- quality steel plate products from Italy. This review covers one producer/exporter of the subject merchandise, Evraz Palini Bertoli S.p.A. (Palini). The period of review (POR) is February 1, 2008 through January 31, 2009.
Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, Request for Revocation in Part, and Deferral of Initiation of Administrative Review
The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') has received requests to conduct administrative reviews of various antidumping and countervailing duty orders and findings with December anniversary dates. In accordance with our regulations, we are initiating those administrative reviews. The Department also received requests to revoke one antidumping duty order in part and to defer the initiation of an administrative review for the same antidumping duty order.
Hand Trucks and Certain Parts Thereof From The People's Republic of China: Notice of Decision of the Court of International Trade Not in Harmony
On October 22, 2008, the United States Court of International Trade (``CIT'' or ``Court'') sustained the final remand determination made by the Department of Commerce (``the Department'') pursuant to the Court's remand of the scope ruling of the antidumping duty order on hand trucks from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''). See Gleason Industrial Products, Inc. v. United States, Ct. No. 06-00089, Slip Op. 08-115 (Ct. Int'l Trade October 22, 2008) (``Gleason III''). This case arises out of the Department's antidumping duty order on hand trucks and certain parts thereof from the People's Republic of China. The final judgment in this case was not in harmony with the Department's February 2006 final scope ruling.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
