753 F.3d 1237
Fed. Cir.2014Background
- This case concerns a countervailing duty investigation of aluminum extrusions from China and a final all-others rate set by Commerce.
- Commerce selected three mandatory respondents (non-cooperating) and two voluntary respondents for individual investigation.
- Voluntary respondents received individual rates; mandatory respondents received AFA-based rates due to non-cooperation.
- Commerce initially discarded AFA rates for mandatory respondents and relied on voluntary rates exclusion under 19 C.F.R. § 351.204(d)(3).
- Because voluntary rates were excluded, Commerce used the exception to establish an all-others rate of 374.15% (AFA-based).
- Court of International Trade remanded after holding ambiguity and later sustained an approved method, ultimately leading to this appeal and reversal by the Federal Circuit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether voluntary respondent rates are included in the all-others rate calculation under § 1671d(c)(5)(A). | Appellants contend the statute unambiguously requires inclusion of voluntary rates. | Commerce argues § 1671d is ambiguous and regulation excludes voluntary rates from the all-others calculation. | Statute unambiguously requires inclusion of voluntary rates in the general all-others rate. |
| Whether 19 C.F.R. § 351.204(d)(3) is invalid given the statute. | Appellants assert regulation wrongly excludes voluntary rates, contrary to § 1671d. | Commerce defends regulation as a reasonable interpretation aligning with the statute. | Regulation invalid; exclusion of voluntary rates cannot stand where statute requires inclusion. |
| Whether the all-others rate may be based entirely on AFA rates. | Appellants challenge using only AFA-derived rates for all-others as unreasonable. | Commerce may use a reasonable method under § 1671d(c)(5)(A)(ii), including AFA-based calculations. | All-others rate may be based on AFA rates under the exception if reasonable. |
| Whether voluntary respondents are “individually investigated” under § 1671d(c)(5)(A). | Voluntary respondents are not necessarily “individually investigated”; the majority misreads statutory terms. | Voluntary respondents receive individual rates and are examined in parallel with mandatory respondents. | Voluntary respondents are within the meaning of “exporters and producers individually investigated” for purposes of calculating all-others. |
Key Cases Cited
- MacLean-Fogg Co. v. United States, 836 F.Supp.2d 1367 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2012) (ambiguous statute on inclusion of voluntary rates (MacLean-Fogg I))
- MacLean-Fogg Co. v. United States, 853 F.Supp.2d 1253 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2012) (reconsideration; regulation upheld to be reasonable (MacLean-Fogg II))
- MacLean-Fogg Co. v. United States, 853 F.Supp.2d 1336 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2012) (remand; final all-others rate based on AFA (MacLean-Fogg III))
- MacLean-Fogg Co. v. United States, 885 F.Supp.2d 1337 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2012) (final all-others rate sustained then reversed (MacLean-Fogg IV))
- Kajaria Iron Castings Pvt. Ltd. v. United States, 156 F.3d 1163 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (pre-1994 regime; inclusion of individual rates in country-wide rate)
- Ipsco, Inc. v. United States, 899 F.2d 1192 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (include individual rates in country-wide rate when calculating country-wide average)