997 F.Supp.2d 1330 (CIT 2014), 10-00254, Dongguan Sunrise Furniture Co. Ltd. v. United States

Docket Nº:10-00254
Citation:997 F.Supp.2d 1330
Opinion Judge:Jane A. Restani, Judge
Party Name:DONGGUAN SUNRISE FURNITURE CO., LTD., TAICANG SUNRISE WOOD INDUSTRY CO., LTD., TAICANG FAIRMONT DESIGNS FURNITURE CO., LTD., and MEIZHOU SUNRISE FURNITURE CO., LTD., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant, LONGRANGE FURNITURE CO., LTD., Consolidated Plaintiff, COASTER COMPANY OF AMERICA and LANGFANG TIANCHENG FURNITURE CO., LTD., Plaintiff-Interve
Attorney:No. 10-00254 Peter J. Koenig, Squire Sanders (U.S.) LLP, of Washington, DC, for plaintiffs. Lizbeth R. Levinson and Ronald M. Wisla, Kutak Rock LLP, of Washington, DC, for consolidated plaintiff. Kristin H. Mowry, Jeffrey S. Grimson, Jill A. Cramer, Sarah M. Wyss, and Daniel R. Wilson, Mowry & Gr...
Case Date:July 18, 2014
Court:Court of International Trade

Page 1330

997 F.Supp.2d 1330 (CIT 2014)

DONGGUAN SUNRISE FURNITURE CO., LTD., TAICANG SUNRISE WOOD INDUSTRY CO., LTD., TAICANG FAIRMONT DESIGNS FURNITURE CO., LTD., and MEIZHOU SUNRISE FURNITURE CO., LTD., Plaintiffs,

LONGRANGE FURNITURE CO., LTD., Consolidated Plaintiff,

COASTER COMPANY OF AMERICA and LANGFANG TIANCHENG FURNITURE CO., LTD., Plaintiff-Intervenors,

v.

UNITED STATES, Defendant,

AMERICAN FURNITURE MANUFACTURERS COMMITTEE FOR LEGAL TRADE and VAUGHAN-BASSETT FURNITURE COMPANY, INC., Defendant-Intervenors

No. 10-00254

United States Court of International Trade

July 18, 2014

Page 1331

Antidumping remand results regarding AFA rate remanded to Commerce.

Peter J. Koenig, Squire Sanders (U.S.) LLP, of Washington, DC, for plaintiffs.

Lizbeth R. Levinson and Ronald M. Wisla, Kutak Rock LLP, of Washington, DC, for consolidated plaintiff.

Kristin H. Mowry, Jeffrey S. Grimson, Jill A. Cramer, Sarah M. Wyss, and Daniel R. Wilson, Mowry & Grimson, PLLC, of Washington, DC, for plaintiff-intervenors.

Stephen C. Tosini, Senior Trial Counsel, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, for defendant. With him on the brief were Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney General, Jeanne E. Davidson, Director, and Patricia M. McCarthy, Assistant Director. Of counsel on the brief was Rebecca Cantu, Senior Attorney, Office of the Chief Counsel for Trade Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, of Washington, DC.

J. Michael Taylor, Joseph W. Dorn, Daniel L. Schneiderman, and Mark T. Wasden, King & Spalding, LLP, of Washington, DC, for defendant-intervenors.

OPINION

Page 1332

Jane A. Restani, Judge

This matter comes before the court following the court's decision in Dongguan Sunrise Furniture Co. v. United States, 931 F.Supp.2d 1346, 1348 (CIT 2013) (" Dongguan III" ), in which the court remanded Commerce's second redetermination in Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Final Rescission in Part, 75 Fed. Reg. 50,992, 50,992 (Dep't Commerce Aug. 18, 2010) (" Final Results" ), to the U.S. Department of Commerce (" Commerce" ) to reconsider its four partial adverse facts available (" AFA" ) rates assigned to Fairmont's unreported sales of dressers, armoires, chests, and nightstands. For the reasons stated below, the court finds that Commerce's selected AFA rates are not supported by substantial evidence, and thus Commerce's third remand results are remanded.

BACKGROUND

The facts of this case have been documented in the court's previous opinions. See generally Dongguan III, 931 F.Supp.2d at 1348-49. The court presumes familiarity with those decisions but summarizes the facts as relevant to this opinion. In the Final Results, Plaintiffs Dongguan Sunrise Furniture Co., Ltd., Taicang Sunrise Wood Industry Co., Ltd., Taicang Fairmont Designs Furniture Co., Ltd., and Meizhou Sunrise Furniture Co., Ltd. (collectively " Fairmont" or " Plaintiff" ) received a rate of 43.23%, which was calculated based on a rate of approximately 34% for reported sales and a partial adverse facts available (" AFA" ) rate of 216.01% for unreported sales. Final Results, 75 Fed. Reg. at 50,997; Dongguan Sunrise Furniture Co. v. United States, 865 F.Supp.2d 1216, 1234 (CIT 2012) (" Dongguan I" ). In Dongguan I, the court sustained Commerce's application of a partial AFA rate to calculate the overall dumping margin, but held that Commerce's selected AFA rate of 216.01% was not supported by substantial evidence. 865 F.Supp.2d at 1232-34. Commerce failed to demonstrate that the 216.01% rate, which was calculated in a new shipper review for a different entity during a different period of review (" POR" ), was relevant and reliable for Fairmont. Id. at 1233.

On remand, Commerce grouped the unreported sales into four categories based on general product type: armoires, chests, nightstands, and dressers. Dongguan Sunrise Furniture Co. v. United States, 904 F.Supp.2d 1359, 1362 (CIT 2013) (" Dongguan II" ). Commerce then determined

Page 1333

an AFA margin for each of the four general product types by selecting the single highest CONNUM-specific 1 margin below 216.01% from Fairmont's reported sales that fell within the corresponding general categories.2 Id. Fairmont received a rate of 39.41%, which included partial AFA rates of 182.15% for the unreported armoires, 215.51% for the unreported chests, 134.42% for the unreported nightstands, and 183.52% for the unreported dressers. Id.; Dongguan III, 931 F.Supp.2d at 1348. The court again remanded to Commerce, stating that Commerce had failed to demonstrate " a rational relationship between the AFA rates chosen and a reasonably accurate estimate of Fairmont's actual rate," because the AFA rates were based on minuscule percentages of Fairmont's actual sales. Dongguan II, 904 F.Supp.2d at 1363-64. The court also noted that the weighted-average margin for the reported sales, which constituted the vast majority of Fairmont's sales during the POR, indicated that Fairmont's actual rate was much lower than the selected AFA rates. Id. at 1364.

During the second remand proceedings, Commerce calculated partial AFA rates of 189% for the unreported armoires, 161% for the unreported chests, 140% for the unreported nightstands, and 161% for the unreported dressers, which resulted in an overall rate of 41.75%.3 Dongguan III, 931 F.Supp.2d at 1349. Commerce arrived at the partial AFA rates by selecting the single-highest CONNUM-specific margin below 216% where at least 0.04% of the total reported sales in that product category were dumped at or above the selected margin. Id. Once again, the...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP