Bio-Lab, Inc. v. United States
2025 CIT 39
Ct. Intl. Trade2025Background
- This action reviews the final results of the U.S. Department of Commerce's administrative review of an antidumping order on chlorinated isocyanurates from China, covering June 2021 to May 2022.
- Plaintiffs (Bio-Lab, Inc., Innovative Water Care LLC, and Occidental Chemical) and consolidated plaintiffs (Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co., Ltd. and Heze Huayi Chemical Co., Ltd.) challenge multiple aspects of Commerce’s surrogate country selection and surrogate value (SV) determinations.
- Central disputes include Commerce’s refusal to select Mexico as the primary surrogate country (SC), its use of Romania as SC, and its surrogate value choices for labor and input materials.
- Plaintiffs claim Commerce misapplied statutory criteria by prioritizing economic comparability over merchandise comparability, and by treating calcium and sodium hypochlorite as comparable products to chlorinated isocyanurates.
- The court grants partial remand to Commerce for reconsideration or further explanation regarding major input classification, comparability analysis, labor SV selection, and certain surrogate production process findings, while sustaining other aspects.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Commerce’s exclusion of Mexico as a surrogate country | Mexico is economically comparable and only “thinly” excluded; exclusion misapplies statutory requirements. | Consistent, objective GNI-based cutoff; countries on SC List are properly comparable. | Commerce’s exclusion of Mexico supported by substantial evidence and law. |
| Economic comparability vs. merchandise comparability | Law does not prioritize economic comparability over merchandise comparability. | Sequential SC selection (economic comparability first) is lawful and reasonable. | Commerce’s sequential approach comports with statute’s best reading and prevailing authority. |
| Calcium and sodium hypochlorite as comparable merchandise | Insufficient similarity in physical characteristics, end use, production process; calcium hypo improperly compared. | Products are sufficiently comparable; prior reviews routinely adopted this approach. | Remand for further, more detailed explanation/lication re: comparability and process similarities. |
| Selection of Romanian labor data over Malaysian labor data | Romanian data is broad, not manufacturing-specific or contemporaneous; Malaysia provides better data. | Malaysian data is tainted by forced labor; Romania provides best usable SV for all FOPs. | Remand for Commerce to address concerns and further explain/reconsider its selection. |
| Selection of Romania instead of Malaysia as primary SC | Malaysia provides better financial ratios and input data than Romania. | Romania only country with reliable SVs for all FOPs, and labor concerns in Malaysia persist. | Defer resolution pending remand on labor data; Romanian choice otherwise reasonable. |
Key Cases Cited
- Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, 340 U.S. 474 (establishes substantial evidence review standard for agency action)
- Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass’n of U.S., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29 (sets out the "arbitrary and capricious" standard for agency review)
- Consol. Edison Co. of N.Y. v. NLRB, 305 U.S. 197 (defines substantial evidence in administrative law)
- SKF USA Inc. v. United States, 263 F.3d 1369 (agency actions arbitrary if similarly situated cases are treated differently without sufficient reason)
- Zhejiang DunAn Hetian Metal Co. v. United States, 652 F.3d 1333 (affirms Commerce’s broad discretion with best available information in NME proceedings)
- Nation Ford Chem. Co. v. United States, 166 F.3d 1373 (choice of surrogate value does not require duplicating exact domestic experience)
- Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (provides doctrinal foundation for agency deference, referenced in statutory interpretation discussion)
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co., 323 U.S. 134 (judicial review of agency legal interpretations according to their persuasiveness)
- Loper Bright Enters. v. Raimondo, 603 U.S. 369 (clarifies judicial duty to independently interpret statutes, even considering agency expertise)