Rhone-Poulenc, Inc. v. United States

Court of International Trade

Rhone-Poulenc, Inc. v. United States

21 Ct. Int'l Trade 165, 951 F. Supp. 1027, 21 C.I.T. 165, 19 I.T.R.D. (BNA) 1544, 1997 Ct. Intl. Trade LEXIS 11

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Rhone-Poulenc, Inc. v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 573 →

United States Court of International Trade·Decided February 4, 1997·No. Court No. 95-03-00275·Published

Opinion

JUDGMENT

Wallach, Judge:

On May 9, 1996, this Court remanded¹ to the Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration (“Commerce”), one issue arising from the anti-dumping determination titled Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Coumarin From the People’s Republic of China, 59 Fed. Reg. 66895 (Dep’t Comm. 1994).

Pursuant to the remand order, Commerce filed its Remand Determination: Rhone-Poulenc, Inc. v. United States on September 23,1996. Upon finding errors in the Remand Determination, Commerce filed its Amended Remand Determination: Rhone-Poulenc, Inc. v. United States as of October 3, 1996 (the “Amended Remand Results”). In accordance with the remand order, the amended remand results reflect that Commerce reconsidered its valuation of the by-products of coumarin production by Respondents in light of the presence of impurities, recalculated the value of the by-products, and adjusted the subject Chinese exporters’ dumping margins accordingly. Commerce was forced to apply best information available in revaluing Tianjin Native Produce Import and Export Corp.’s by-products because of the company’s failure to provide information in response to Commerce’s remand questionnaire. After recalculation, the margins are as follows:

Jiangsu Native Produce Import and Export Corp.31.02%

Tianjin Native Produce Import and Export Corp. 70.45%

PRC-Wide Rate. 160.80% (no change).

In Plaintiffs Comments on Amended Remand Determination, filed as of October 7, 1996, Rhone-Poulenc indicated its concurrence with the Amended Remand Results, and asked that they be affirmed by this Court.

For the foregoing reasons, it is hereby

Ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Amended Remand Results are affirmed; and it is further

Ordered, adjudged and decreed that, all other issues having been decided, this case is dismissed.

Footnotes

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

JUDGMENT

Wallach, Judge:

On May 9, 1996, this Court remanded¹ to the Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration (“Commerce”), one issue arising from the anti-dumping determination titled Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Coumarin From the People’s Republic of China, 59 Fed. Reg. 66895 (Dep’t Comm. 1994).

Pursuant to the remand order, Commerce filed its Remand Determination: Rhone-Poulenc, Inc. v. United States on September 23,1996. Upon finding errors in the Remand Determination, Commerce filed its Amended Remand Determination: Rhone-Poulenc, Inc. v. United States as of October 3, 1996 (the “Amended Remand Results”). In accordance with the remand order, the amended remand results reflect that Commerce reconsidered its valuation of the by-products of coumarin production by Respondents in light of the presence of impurities, recalculated the value of the by-products, and adjusted the subject Chinese exporters’ dumping margins accordingly. Commerce was forced to apply best information available in revaluing Tianjin Native Produce Import and Export Corp.’s by-products because of the company’s failure to provide information in response to Commerce’s remand questionnaire. After recalculation, the margins are as follows:

Jiangsu Native Produce Import and Export Corp.31.02%

Tianjin Native Produce Import and Export Corp. 70.45%

PRC-Wide Rate. 160.80% (no change).

In Plaintiffs Comments on Amended Remand Determination, filed as of October 7, 1996, Rhone-Poulenc indicated its concurrence with the Amended Remand Results, and asked that they be affirmed by this Court.

For the foregoing reasons, it is hereby

Ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Amended Remand Results are affirmed; and it is further

Ordered, adjudged and decreed that, all other issues having been decided, this case is dismissed.

Footnotes

Rhone-Poulenc, Inc. v. United States, 21 Ct. Int'l Trade 165, 951 F. Supp. 1027, 21 C.I.T. 165, 19 I.T.R.D. (BNA) 1544, 1997 Ct. Intl. Trade LEXIS 11 (cit 1997).

Pincite

21 Ct. Int'l Trade 165 (Rhone-Poulenc, Inc. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.