703 F.Supp.2d 1330 (CIT 2010), 05-00192, Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee v. United States

Docket Nº:Court 05-00192.
Citation:703 F.Supp.2d 1330
Opinion Judge:STANCEU, Judge.
Party Name:AD HOC SHRIMP TRADE ACTION COMMITTEE, Versaggi Shrimp Corporation, and Indian Ridge Shrimp Company, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant, and Eastern Fish Company, Inc., Defendant-Intervenor. Slip Op. 10-39.
Attorney:Picard Kentz & Rowe LLP (Nathaniel M. Rickard and Andrew W. Kentz) for plaintiffs Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee and Versaggi Shrimp Corporation. Stewart and Stewart (Geert M. De Prest, Elizabeth J. Drake, and Terence P. Stewart) and Leake & Andersson, LLP (Edward T. Hayes), Washington, DC,...
Case Date:April 14, 2010
Court:Court of International Trade
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 1330

703 F.Supp.2d 1330 (CIT 2010)

AD HOC SHRIMP TRADE ACTION COMMITTEE, Versaggi Shrimp Corporation, and Indian Ridge Shrimp Company, Plaintiffs,

v.

UNITED STATES, Defendant,

and

Eastern Fish Company, Inc., Defendant-Intervenor.

Slip Op. 10-39.

Court No. 05-00192.

United States Court of International Trade.

April 14, 2010

Page 1331

Picard Kentz & Rowe LLP (Nathaniel M. Rickard and Andrew W. Kentz) for plaintiffs Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee and Versaggi Shrimp Corporation.

Stewart and Stewart (Geert M. De Prest, Elizabeth J. Drake, and Terence P. Stewart) and Leake & Andersson, LLP (Edward T. Hayes), Washington, DC, for plaintiff Indian Ridge Shrimp Company.

Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Jeanne E. Davidson, Director, Patricia M. McCarthy, Assistant Director, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice (Stephen C. Tosini); Mykhaylo A. Gryzlov, Office of the Chief Counsel for Import Administration, United States Department of Commerce, of counsel, for defendant.

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP (Michael J. Coursey and Mary T. Staley), Washington, DC, for defendant-intervenor.

OPINION

STANCEU, Judge.

This matter arose from plaintiffs' contesting six amended final " less-than-fair-value" (" LTFV" ) determinations that the International Trade Administration, United States Department of Commerce (" Commerce" or the " Department" ) issued on imports of certain frozen warmwater shrimp (the " subject merchandise" ). In Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee v. United States, 33 CIT __, __, 637 F.Supp.2d 1166, 1182 (2009) (" Ad Hoc III " ), the court ordered Commerce to redetermine the scope of its amended final LTFV determinations with respect to dusted shrimp, a product consisting of flour-coated frozen shrimp that the Department had excluded. The court held that Commerce did not state reasoning adequate to support the dusted shrimp exclusion and that, as a result, the LTFV determinations were contrary to law. Id. at __, 637 F.Supp.2d at 1181. " Commerce failed to consider, and failed to resolve, the question of whether dusted shrimp is within the proposed scope of the antidumping investigation or investigations sought by the Petitions." Id.

In the redetermination issued by Commerce pursuant to the court's remand order, Commerce concluded that it had erred in excluding dusted shrimp from the scope of the LTFV determinations and drafted amended scope language to include the product. Final Results of Redetermination pursuant to Ct. Remand 18, App. 1 (" Redetermination" ). Plaintiffs Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee (" AHSTAC" ), Versaggi Shrimp Corporation (" Versaggi" ), and Indian Ridge Shrimp Company (" Indian Ridge" ) (collectively

Page 1332

" plaintiffs" or " petitioners" ) urge the court to affirm the Redetermination. Pls.' Comments Regarding Final Results of Redetermination pursuant to Ct. Remand 1 (" AHSTAC & Versaggi Comments" ); Comments of Indian Ridge Shrimp Co. Regarding the Remand Results 2 (" Indian Ridge Comments" ). Defendant-intervenor Eastern Fish Company, Inc. (" Eastern Fish" ) urges the court to reject the Redetermination as contrary to law. Def.-Intervenor's Comments Regarding Final Results of Redetermination pursuant to Ct. Remand 15-16 (" Def.-Intervenor Comments" ). The arguments of Eastern Fish fail to persuade the court. Because Commerce complied with the remand order in Ad Hoc III and lawfully redetermined the scope of the investigations, the court will affirm the Redetermination through the entry of judgment.

I. BACKGROUND

The background of this case is presented in the court's opinions in Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee v. United States, 31 CIT 102, 103-09, 473 F.Supp.2d 1336, 1337-42 (2007) (" Ad Hoc I " ), and Ad Hoc III, 33 CIT at __, 637 F.Supp.2d at 1168-74, which the court recounts in part below and supplements as necessary to include developments occurring since Ad Hoc III was decided on July 1, 2009.

Plaintiffs brought multiple actions, later consolidated, to contest six amended final affirmative LTFV antidumping determinations that Commerce issued in 2005 on certain imported frozen warmwater shrimp from each of the following countries: Brazil, Ecuador, India, the People's Republic of China, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, and Thailand.1 See, e.g., Notice of Am. Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Thailand, 70 Fed.Reg. 5145 (Feb. 1, 2005). Each of the final and amended final LTFV determinations excluded dusted shrimp from the scope of the investigation, and Commerce accordingly excluded dusted shrimp from the scope of each of the six antidumping duty orders. Id. at 5147.2

In this litigation, plaintiffs, who were petitioners in...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP