Heveafil Sdn. Bhd. v. United States, 032112 USCIT, 04-00477
|Opinion Judge:||Richard W. Goldberg Senior Judge|
|Party Name:||HEVEAFIL SDN. BHD., FILMAX SDN. BHD AND HEVEAFIL USA INC., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant. Slip Op. 12-38|
|Attorney:||Walter J. Spak and Jay C. Campbell, White & Case LLP, for the Plaintiff. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General; Jeanne E. Davidson, Director; Patricia M. McCarthy, Assistant Director; and Stephen C. Tosini, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice, for the Defendant.|
|Judge Panel:||Before Richard W. Goldberg, Senior Judge|
|Case Date:||March 21, 2012|
|Court:||Court of Appeals of International Trade|
Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Agency Record is granted and the final results of the changed circumstances review are remanded.
OPINION & ORDER
Plaintiffs Heveafil Sdn. Bhd., Filmax Sdn. Bhd., and Heveafil USA Inc. (collectively "Heveafil") contest the U.S. Department of Commerce's ("Commerce") final results in the changed circumstances review of the antidumping duty order on extruded rubber thread from Malaysia. Extruded Rubber Thread from Malaysia: Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review of the Antidumping Duty Order and Intent To Revoke Antidumping Duty Order, 69 Fed. Reg. 51, 989 (Dep't Commerce Aug. 24, 2004) ("Final Results").
In 1992, Commerce published an antidumping duty order for extruded rubber thread from Malaysia. Extruded Rubber Thread from Malaysia: Antidumping Duty Order and Amendment of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 57 Fed. Reg. 46, 150 (Dep't Commerce Oct. 7, 1992). Heveafil was subject to the order.
Commerce conducted an administrative review of the order for the period October 1, 1995 through September 30, 1996. Extruded Rubber Thread from Malaysia: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 63 Fed. Reg. 12, 752 (Dep't Commerce Mar. 16, 1998). Heveafil challenged the results of the 1995–1996 review. As a result, Commerce suspended liquidation of the entries covered by that review.1
In 2004, Heveafil requested a changed circumstances review. Heveafil contended that the sole United States manufacturer of domestic like product, North American Rubber Thread Co., Inc. ("NART"), had declared bankruptcy and ceased operations, warranting revocation of the order. Commerce initiated the requested changed circumstances review.
In the final results of the changed circumstances review, Commerce revoked the order effective October 1, 2003, the date of the last completed administrative review. At that time, the trustee in bankruptcy for NART supported Commerce's revocation date of...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP