Peer Bearing Co. v. United States

Court of International Trade

Peer Bearing Co. v. United States

24 Ct. Int'l Trade 143, 2000 CIT 22

CourtUnited States Court of International Trade

DecidedFebruary 22, 2000

DocketCourt 97-12-02123

StatusPublished

This text of 24 Ct. Int'l Trade 143 (Peer Bearing Co. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of International Trade primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Peer Bearing Co. v. United States, 24 Ct. Int'l Trade 143, 2000 CIT 22 (cit 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

JUDGMENT

Tsoucalas, Senior Judge:

On July 21, 1999, this Court remanded to the United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration (“Commerce”) for correction of a clerical error arising from the final results of the administrative review, entitled Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From the People’s Republic of China; Final Results of Antidumping Administrative Review, 62 Fed. Reg. 61,276 (Nov. 17,1997). See Peer Bearing Co. v. United States, 23 CIT 454, 460, 57 F. Supp. 2d 1200, 1206 (1999). The Court ordered Commerce to correct the inadvertent reversal of the skilled and unskilled labor rates in its calculation of factors of production and to adjust the dumping margins accordingly. See id. at 1203.

On September 17, 1999, Commerce released draft remand results in this action. The Timken Company (“Timken”) submitted a comment on the draft remand results. In its comment, Timken argued that recalculation of the dumping margin was unnecessary.

On October 19, 1999, pursuant to the Court’s remand order, Commerce filed its Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, Peer Bearing Co. v. United States, Court No. 97-12-02123 (“Remand Results”) (July 21,1999). In the Remand Results, Commerce corrected the clerical error reversing the labor rates and recalculated the margin for the Peer Bearing Company (“Peer”). Remand Results at 1, 4.

In its comments on the Remand Results, Timken argues (1) that recalculation of the dumping margin was unnecessary, and (2) that Commerce erroneously assigned the corrected rate to Peer, the importer, instead of Chin Jun Industrial Ltd. (“Chin Jun”), the reseller. Accordingly, Timken contends that Commerce’s Remand Results should not be affirmed.

The Court finds that contrary to Timken’s arguments, recalculation of the dumping margin became necessary when Commerce corrected the skilled and unskilled labor rates. Furthermore, the Court finds that it is unnecessary to remand the case to apply the corrected rate to Chin Jun. It is obvious that Commerce had properly calculated and applied the rate to Chin Jun and had inadvertently switched the names of the companies in the Remand Results.

Since Commerce has complied with this Court’s remand order, it is hereby

*144 Ordered that the Remand Results are affirmed in their entirety, and all other issues having been previously decided, it is further

Ordered that this case is dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

JUDGMENT

Tsoucalas, Senior Judge:

On July 21, 1999, this Court remanded to the United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration (“Commerce”) for correction of a clerical error arising from the final results of the administrative review, entitled Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From the People’s Republic of China; Final Results of Antidumping Administrative Review, 62 Fed. Reg. 61,276 (Nov. 17,1997). See Peer Bearing Co. v. United States, 23 CIT 454, 460, 57 F. Supp. 2d 1200, 1206 (1999). The Court ordered Commerce to correct the inadvertent reversal of the skilled and unskilled labor rates in its calculation of factors of production and to adjust the dumping margins accordingly. See id. at 1203.

On September 17, 1999, Commerce released draft remand results in this action. The Timken Company (“Timken”) submitted a comment on the draft remand results. In its comment, Timken argued that recalculation of the dumping margin was unnecessary.

On October 19, 1999, pursuant to the Court’s remand order, Commerce filed its Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, Peer Bearing Co. v. United States, Court No. 97-12-02123 (“Remand Results”) (July 21,1999). In the Remand Results, Commerce corrected the clerical error reversing the labor rates and recalculated the margin for the Peer Bearing Company (“Peer”). Remand Results at 1, 4.

In its comments on the Remand Results, Timken argues (1) that recalculation of the dumping margin was unnecessary, and (2) that Commerce erroneously assigned the corrected rate to Peer, the importer, instead of Chin Jun Industrial Ltd. (“Chin Jun”), the reseller. Accordingly, Timken contends that Commerce’s Remand Results should not be affirmed.

The Court finds that contrary to Timken’s arguments, recalculation of the dumping margin became necessary when Commerce corrected the skilled and unskilled labor rates. Furthermore, the Court finds that it is unnecessary to remand the case to apply the corrected rate to Chin Jun. It is obvious that Commerce had properly calculated and applied the rate to Chin Jun and had inadvertently switched the names of the companies in the Remand Results.

Since Commerce has complied with this Court’s remand order, it is hereby

*144 Ordered that the Remand Results are affirmed in their entirety, and all other issues having been previously decided, it is further

Ordered that this case is dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 Ct. Int'l Trade 143, 2000 CIT 22, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peer-bearing-co-v-united-states-cit-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack