Ashley Furniture Indus. v. United States

• Decision Date: 28 March 2022
• Docket Number: Slip Op. 22-29,21-00283
• Court: U.S. Court of International Trade
• Parties: ASHLEY FURNITURE INDUSTRIES, LLC; ASHLEY FURNITURE TRADING COMPANY; WANEK FURNITURE CO., LTD.; MILLENNIUM FURNITURE CO., LTD.; AND COMFORT BEDDING COMPANY LIMITED, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant, and BROOKLYN BEDDING, LLC; CORSICANA MATTRESS COMPANY; ELITE COMFORT SOLUTIONS; FXI, INC.; INNOCOR, INC.; KOLCRAFT ENTERPRISES INC.; LEGGETT & PLATT, INCORPORATED; THE INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS; AND UNITED STEEL, PAPER AND FORESTRY, RUBBER, MANUFACTURING, ENERGY, ALLIED INDUSTRIAL AND SERVICE WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, AFL-CIO, Defendant-Intervenors.

ASHLEY FURNITURE INDUSTRIES, LLC; ASHLEY FURNITURE TRADING COMPANY; WANEK FURNITURE CO., LTD.; MILLENNIUM FURNITURE CO., LTD.; AND COMFORT BEDDING COMPANY LIMITED, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant, and BROOKLYN BEDDING, LLC; CORSICANA MATTRESS COMPANY; ELITE COMFORT SOLUTIONS; FXI, INC.; INNOCOR, INC.; KOLCRAFT ENTERPRISES INC.; LEGGETT & PLATT, INCORPORATED; THE INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS; AND UNITED STEEL, PAPER AND FORESTRY, RUBBER, MANUFACTURING, ENERGY, ALLIED INDUSTRIAL AND SERVICE WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, AFL-CIO, Defendant-Intervenors.

No. 21-00283

Slip Op. 22-29

Court of Appeals of International Trade

March 28, 2022

[Granting plaintiffs' motion for statutory injunction in part and denying plaintiffs' motion in part.]

Before: Timothy M. Reif, Judge

Kristin H. Mowry, Mowry & Grimson, PLLC, of Washington D.C., argued for plaintiffs. With her on the brief were Jeffrey S. Grimson, Sarah M. Wyss, and Wenhui (Flora) Ji.

Kara M. Westercamp, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice, of Washington, D.C., argued for defendant. With her on the brief were Brian M. Boynton, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Jeanne E. Davidson, Director, and L. Misha Preheim, Assistant Director. Of counsel on the brief was Vania Wang, Attorney, Office of the Chief Counsel for Trade Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, of Washington, D.C.

OPINION

Timothy M. Reif, Judge

This action arises from a challenge by plaintiffs, Ashley Furniture Industries, LLC ("AFI"), Ashley Furniture Trading Company ("AFTC"), Wanek Furniture Co., Ltd. ("Wanek"), Millennium Furniture Co., Ltd. ("Millennium"), and Comfort Bedding Company Limited ("Comfort Bedding") (collectively, "plaintiffs") to certain aspects of the final affirmative determination by the U.S. Department of Commerce ("Commerce") in the antidumping duty ("AD") investigation and order on mattresses from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam ("Vietnam"). See Mattresses from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value ("Final Determination"), 86 Fed.Reg. 15, 889 (Dep't of Commerce Mar. 25, 2021) (final determination) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum, A-552-827 (Dep't of Commerce Mar. 18, 2021) ("IDM"); Mattresses from Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Serbia, Thailand, the Republic of Turkey, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Antidumping Duty Orders and Amended Final Affirmative Antidumping Determination for Cambodia ("Vietnam Mattresses Order"), 86 Fed.Reg. 26, 460 (Dep't of Commerce May 14, 2021) (antidumping duty order).

Plaintiffs move for a statutory injunction pursuant to section 516A(c)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. § 1516a(c)(2) (2018), ^[1] and United States Court of International Trade ("USCIT" or the "Court") Rules 7(b) and 56.2(a) ordering that defendant, United States, is enjoined during the pendency of this litigation, including any appeals, from issuing instructions to liquidate or permitting the liquidation of certain unliquidated entries of mattresses from Vietnam. Mot. for Stat. Inj. ("Pls. Br.") at 1-2, ECF No. 20; see also Reply to Def.'s Partial Opp'n to Pls.' Mot. for Stat. Inj. ("Pls. Reply Br.") at 2-3, ECF No. 32. Plaintiffs move specifically to enjoin defendant from liquidating any entries that: (1) were imported by AFI or AFTC and produced and/or exported by Wanek, Millennium or Comfort Bedding; (2) were the subject of Commerce's Final Determination and Vietnam Mattresses Order; and (3) were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after November 3, 2020, excluding any merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, between May 2, 2021, and May 13, 2021.^[2] Pls. Br. at 2.

Defendant partially opposes plaintiffs' motion. See Def.'s Partial Opp'n to Pls.' Mot. for Stat. Inj. ("Def. Resp. Br."), ECF No. 27. Although defendant consents to a statutory injunction covering plaintiffs' unliquidated entries through April 30, 2022, the end of the period of review ("POR") for the first administrative review ("AR"), defendant opposes the injunction of indeterminate scope^[3] that plaintiffs seek that would cover any unliquidated entries that might be made through to the conclusion of this litigation. Id. at 2-3; see Pls. Br. at 2. Accordingly, plaintiffs and defendant dispute only whether the injunction on liquidation should cover entries that might be made after April 30, 2022 (plaintiffs' "future entries").

For the reasons discussed below, the court grants plaintiffs' motion in part and denies the motion in part.

BACKGROUND

On March 31, 2020, Brooklyn Bedding, LLC, Corsicana Mattress Company, Elite Comfort Solutions, FXI, Inc., Innocor, Inc., Kolcraft Enterprises Inc., Leggett & Platt, Incorporated, The International Brotherhood of Teamsters, and United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO (collectively, "petitioners") filed a petition with Commerce and the Commission to impose antidumping duties on imports of mattresses from Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Serbia, Thailand, the Republic of Turkey ("Turkey") and Vietnam, and to impose countervailing duties ("CVD") on mattress imports from the People's Republic of China ("China"). See Mattresses from Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Serbia, Thailand, the Republic of Turkey, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Less-than-Fair-Value Investigations, 85 Fed.Reg. 23, 002 (Dep't of Commerce Apr. 24, 2020) (initiation of antidumping duty investigations). On April 24, 2020, Commerce initiated AD investigations on mattresses from Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Serbia, Thailand, Turkey and Vietnam, as well as a CVD investigation on mattresses from China. See id.; Mattresses from the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation, 85 Fed.Reg. 22, 998 (Dep't of Commerce April 24, 2020) (initiation of countervailing duty investigation).

On November 3, 2020, Commerce published its Preliminary Determination in Commerce's AD investigation of mattresses from Vietnam. See Mattresses from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value, Postponement of Final Determination, and Extension of Provisional Measures ("Preliminary Determination"), 85 Fed.Reg. 69, 591 (Dep't of Commerce Nov. 3, 2020) (preliminary determination) and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum, A-552-827 (Dep't of Commerce Oct. 27, 2020) ("PDM"). In its Preliminary Determination, Commerce collapsed Wanek, Millennium and Comfort Bedding into a single entity pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 351.401(f) - a decision that was not contested by plaintiffs or other parties in the investigation. See Second Am. Compl. at 5, ECF No. 24; PDM at 2 n.11.

On December 29, 2020, plaintiffs filed a case brief disputing Commerce's Preliminary Determination. See IDM at 2, 17-24, 36-39. Subsequently, Commerce held a hearing in its AD investigation on February 11, 2021. See id. at 2.

On March 18, 2021, Commerce issued its Final Determination, which it published in the Federal Register on March 25, 2021. See Final Determination. Considering certain adjustments made in the Final Determination, Commerce assigned a 144.92% weighted-average dumping margin to Wanek, Millennium and Comfort Bedding. Id.

On May 14, 2021, Commerce published the Vietnam Mattresses Order. See Vietnam Mattresses Order. In addition, on May 14, 2021, the Commission published its final affirmative injury determination on mattresses from Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Serbia, Thailand, Turkey and Vietnam. See Mattresses from Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Serbia, Thailand, Turkey, and Vietnam, 86 Fed.Reg. 26, 545 (ITC May 14, 2021).

STANDARD OF REVIEW

This Court has jurisdiction to hear the underlying action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1581(c) and has authority to grant the requested injunctive relief pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1516a(c)(2). Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1516a(c)(2), the Court "may enjoin the liquidation of some or all entries of merchandise covered by a determination of the Secretary, the administering authority, or the Commission, upon a request by an interested party for such relief and a proper showing that the requested relief should be granted under the circumstances." 19 U.S.C. § 1516a(c)(2) (emphasis supplied).

LEGAL FRAMEWORK

I. Statutory framework for the suspension of liquidation

The United States employs a "retrospective" duty assessment system for the collection of antidumping and countervailing duties. 19 C.F.R. § 351.212(a). Commerce's regulations specify the way in which "final liability for antidumping and countervailing duties is determined after merchandise is imported" as follows:

Generally, the amount of duties to be assessed is determined in a review of the order covering a discrete period of time. If a review is not requested, duties are assessed at the rate established in the completed review covering the most recent prior period or, if no review has been completed, the cash deposit rate applicable at the time merchandise was entered.

Id.

Accordingly, liability for antidumping duties "accrues upon entry of subject merchandise" into the United States. SSAB N. Am. Div. v. U.S. Bureau of Customs & Border Prot., 32 CIT 795, 797, 571 F.Supp.2d 1347, 1350 (2008) (citing Parkdale Int'l v. United States, 475 F.3d 1375, 1376-77 (Fed. Cir. 2007)). However, "the amount of actual liability may not be determined for some time after the entry occurs," and does not become final until the point at which Customs liquidates the subject merchandise.^[4]Am. Power Pull Corp. v. United States, 39 CIT___, ___, 121 F.Supp.3d 1296, 1300 (2015).

...