CAFC Ruling Allows for Reinstatement of Antidumping Duties on Ball Bearings from Japan and the U.K.

May 23, 2013

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) recently issued a ruling reversing rulings made by the Court of International Trade (CIT) and allowing for the reinstatement of antidumping duties on ball bearings from Japan and the United Kingdom. On August 31, 2006, the International Trade Commission (ITC) determined in its Second Sunset Review that revocation of the antidumping duty order on bearings from China, France, Germany, Japan, and the U.K. would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to the domestic industry. The case was appealed at the CIT, and in 2010, following three remand determinations issued by Judge Judith Barzilay, the ITC determined, under protest, that it was “constrained by the Court’s remand instructions to find that subject imports from the [U.K] are not likely to have a discernible adverse impact upon revocation.” In 2011, after the CIT issued its fourth remand determination, the ITC, again under protest, concluded that, with respect to bearings from Japan, it was “compelled by the Court’s instructions to determine that these subject imports are not likely to have a significant impact upon revocation.” The CIT affirmed the negative determinations and the Department of Commerce subsequently revoked its dumping orders.

In its May 16, 2013, ruling, the CAFC found that the ITC’s second remand determination “was supported by substantial evidence, and the Court of International Trade erred by concluding otherwise.” The CAFC reversed multiple of the CIT’s rulings and ordered the CIT to reinstate the ITC’s affirmative material injury determination for Japan and the U.K. In its reversal, the CAFC noted that while “numerous record facts detract from the Commission’s conclusion”, they “do not detract from the Commission’s finding to such an extent that we can say the Commission’s determinations were not supported by substantial evidence.” Given its finding that that there was an adequate basis for the ITC’s determination, the CIT decided to defer to the ITC, stating that “it is the role of the expert factfinder – here the majority of the Presidentially-appointed, Senate-approved Commissioners – to decide which side’s evidence to believe.”

The parties have sixty days from the issuance of the ruling to request a CAFC rehearing or to appeal to the Supreme Court before the antidumping duty orders on ball bearings from Japan and the U.K. are reinstated.

For further information, please contact a Barnes/Richardson attorney.