Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Maverick Tube Corp. v. Toscelik Profil Ve Sac Endustrisi A.S.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit

July 3, 2017

MAVERICK TUBE CORPORATION, BOOMERANG TUBE LLC, ENERGEX TUBE, TEJAS TUBULAR PRODUCTS, TMK IPSCO, VALLOUREC STAR, L.P., WELDED TUBE USA INC., Plaintiffs
v.
TOSCELIK PROFIL VE SAC ENDUSTRISI A.S., CAYIROVA BORU SANAYI VE TICARET A.S., Plaintiffs-Appellants UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee BORUSAN ISTIKBAL TICARET, BORUSAN MANNESMANN BORU SANAYI VE TICARET A.S., Defendants

         Appeal from the United States Court of International Trade in Nos. 1:14-cv-00234-JAR, 1:14-cv-00244-JAR, 1:14-cv-00262-JAR, Senior Judge Jane A. Restani.

          Jonathan Gordon Cooper, Quinn Emanuel Ur-quhart & Sullivan, LLP, Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff-appellee. Also represented by Debbie Leilani Shon, Jon David Corey, Kelsey Rule, Philip Charles Sternhell.

          David L. Simon, Law Offices of David L. Simon, Washington, DC, argued for plaintiffs-appellants. Also represented by Mark B. Lehnardt, Antidumping Defense Group, LLC, Washington, DC.

          Hardeep Kaur Josan, International Trade Field Office, United States Department of Justice, New York, NY, argued for defendant-appellee United States. Also represented by Benjamin C. Mizer, Jeanne E. Davidson, Claudia Burke; Jessica M. Link, Office of Chief Counsel for Trade Enforcement and Compliance, United States Department of Commerce, Washington, DC.

          Before Prost, Chief Judge, Lourie and Stoll, Circuit Judge

          Prost, Chief Judge.

         Appellants, Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endüstrisi A.S., and Çayirova Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (collectively, "Çayirova"), appeal from the final judgment of the United States Court of International Trade ("Trade Court") sustaining Commerce's decision that Çayirova is not entitled to a duty drawback adjustment for its exports of oil country tubular goods[1]. See Maverick Tube Corp. v. United States, 163 F.Supp.3d 1345 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2016). Because Commerce properly interpreted and applied the Tariff Act to deny Çayirova's duty drawback adjustment, we affirm.

         I

         A

         This case involves an antidumping investigation by Commerce into Turkish oil country tubular goods.[2]"Dumping occurs when a foreign firm sells goods in the United States at an export price . . . that is lower than the product's normal value." Saha Thai Steel Pipe (Public) Co. v. United States, 635 F.3d 1335, 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2011). For exporters in non-distorted market economies, the normal value is generally the "price at which the foreign . . . product is first sold . . . for consumption in the exporting country." 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(1)(B)(i). "[T]he amount by which the [normal value] exceeds [export price] is the dumping margin." Id. A higher export price thus yields a lower dumping margin.

         When calculating the dumping margin,

if a foreign country would normally impose an import duty on an input used to manufacture the subject merchandise, but offers a rebate or exemption from the duty if the input is exported to the United States, then Commerce will increase [the export price] to account for the rebated or unpaid import duty (the 'duty drawback').

Saha Thai, 635 F.3d at 1338; see 19 U.S.C. ยง 1677a(c)(1)(B) (providing that the export price "shall be . . . increased by . . . the amount of any import duties imposed by the country of exportation which have been rebated, or which have not been collected, by reason of the exportation of the subject merchandise to the United States"). This adjustment of the export price is called a "duty drawback adjustment." "The purpose of the duty drawback adjustment is to account for the fact that the producers remain subject to the import duty when they sell the subject merchandise domestically, which increases home market sales prices and thereby increases [the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.