Skip to content

#Aluminum

0 items today
Sep 23Wed
  1. CIT · Slip Opinions

    CIT sustains Commerce scope ruling that IPG heat sinks fall within aluminum extrusions orders

    The U.S. Court of International Trade, in Slip Op. 26-117, Court No. 25-00212, denied IPG Photonics Corporation's motion for judgment on the agency record and sustained Commerce's final scope ruling that IPG's four heat sink models do not meet the finished heat sink exclusion and are covered by the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China, Case Nos. A-570-967 and C-570-968. The court held that Commerce's interpretation of the exclusion and its consideration of IPG's evidence were supported by substantial evidence and in accordance with law. The opinion is dated September 23, 2026.

Sep 2Wed
  1. CIT · Slip Opinions

    CIT sustains USITC negative injury determination on aluminum extrusions from 14 countries

    The U.S. Court of International Trade sustained in full the U.S. International Trade Commission's final negative determination in the antidumping and countervailing duty investigations of aluminum extrusions from China, Colombia, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Italy, Malaysia, Mexico, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates and Vietnam, in Slip Op. 26-101, Court No. 24-00209, and denied plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the agency record. The Commission found the domestic industry was neither materially injured nor threatened with material injury by reason of subject imports during the January 2021 to March 2024 period of investigation.

Jun 16Tue
  1. CIT · Slip Opinions

    CIT sustains Commerce's denial of double remedies adjustment in aluminum foil review from China

    The U.S. Court of International Trade sustained Commerce's remand redetermination denying Jiangsu Dingsheng New Materials Joint-Stock Co., Ltd. and affiliated plaintiffs a double remedies adjustment under 19 U.S.C. § 1677f-1(f)(1) in the 2021–2022 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on aluminum foil from China. In Slip Op. 26-63, Court No. 23-00264, Judge Claire R. Kelly held that Commerce's finding that Dingsheng provided insufficient evidence of a subsidy-to-cost link and a cost-to-price link is supported by substantial evidence, and that 19 U.S.C. § 1677m(d) did not require Commerce to give notice of deficiencies in the Double Remedies Questionnaire Response.