2012 Ct. Intl. Trade LEXIS 146
Ct. Intl. Trade2012Background
- Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee v. United States involves four Commerce antidumping determinations in the fifth administrative review of frozen warmwater shrimp from China; plaintiff challenges respondents selection, surrogate country, labor valuation, and use of North Korea data; the court has jurisdiction under 19 U.S.C. § 1516a(a)(2)(B)(iii) and 28 U.S.C. § 1581(c); AHSTAC seeks remand for reconsideration of four issues; the court sustains the mandatory respondent selection but remands on surrogate country and defers labor and NK-data issues pending remand; final remand timing is set with briefing deadlines; the opinion affirms in part and remands in part.
- Hilltop International was chosen as the mandatory respondent based on CBP entry data showing Hilltop as the largest exporter by volume; AHSTAC argued misclassification in a prior review questioned CBP data quality; the court reaffirms that the data were reliable for this review.
- Commerce’s surrogate country selection sought to use a list-based, non-preeminent weight among economic comparability, significant production, and data quality; India was chosen as primary surrogate over Thailand, a decision AHSTAC challenged as not reasonably supported by the record.
- The court finds Commerce’s blanket policy of treating all candidates within a GNI range as equally comparable unreasonable without weighing all three criteria; remands to reconsider India vs Thailand with explanation grounded in record evidence.
- Labor wage valuation and exclusion of NK-import data will be decided after remand because they depend on the ultimate surrogate country selection.
- Conclusion: Final results affirmed for respondent selection; remanded for primary surrogate country determination; remand due by Jan 29, 2013 with subsequent briefing deadlines.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Surrogate country selection was reasonable? | AHSTAC argues India is less economically comparable than Thailand and data quality favors Thailand. | Commerce treated surrogates as equally comparable within GNI range and emphasized data constraints. | Remanded for further consideration of surrogate country selection. |
| Was Commerce's data-quality-based preference over economic comparability permissible? | Commerce should weigh economic comparability against data quality. | Policy prioritizes data quality within surrogate eligibility. | Remanded; policy deemed unreasonable without weighing all criteria. |
| Labor wage rate valuation depends on surrogate choice? | AHSTAC would accept labor valued using alternative surrogate data. | Valuation premised on primary surrogate; pending remand. | Deferred pending remand outcome. |
| Whether to exclude North Korea data when using Indian imports? | North Korea data should be excluded to avoid distortion. | Data handling tied to chosen surrogate; pending remand. | Deferred pending remand outcome. |
Key Cases Cited
- Pakfood Pub. Co. v. United States, 753 F. Supp. 2d 1334 (2011) (data reliability when CBP classifications are not clearly inaccurate)
- Amanda Foods (Vietnam) Ltd. v. United States, 647 F. Supp. 2d 1368 (2009) (weighing multiple surrogate criteria to select primary surrogate)
- Dorbest Ltd. v. United States, 604 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (data quality and comparability considerations in surrogate selection)
- Tianjin Magnesium Int'l Co. v. United States, CIT , 722 F. Supp. 2d 1322 (2010) (case cited for evidentiary standards in remand situations)
- Allentown Mack Sales & Serv., Inc. v. NLRB, 522 U.S. 359 (1998) (reasoned decision-making requires rational basis and statutory grounding)