Euro SME Sdn Bhd v. United States , 2024 CIT 16 ( 2024 )

Slip Op. No. 24-16
UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE
EURO SME SDN BHD,
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES,
Before: Stephen Alexander Vaden,
Judge
Defendant,
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV)
and
POLYETHYLENE RETAIL CARRIER
BAG COMMITTEE, HILEX POLY CO.,
LLC, and SUPERBAG CORP.,
Defendant-Intervenors.
OPINION
[Sustaining Commerce’s Final Determination.]
Dated: February 12, 2024
Kelly Slater, Appleton Luff Pte Ltd. of Washington, DC, for Plaintiff Euro SME Sdn
Bhd. With her on the brief were Jay Y. Nee and Edmund W. Sim.
Meen Geu Oh, Senior Trial Counsel, U.S. Department of Justice of Washington, DC,
for Defendant United States. With him on the brief were Brendan S. Saslow and
Kenneth G. Kays, Of Counsel, U.S. Department of Commerce.
Daniel L. Schneiderman, King & Spalding, LLP of Washington, DC, for Defendant-
Intervenors Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bag Committee; Hilex Poly Co., LLC; and
Superbag Corp. With him on the brief was J. Michael Taylor.
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 2
Vaden, Judge: Plaintiff Euro SME Sdn Bhd (Euro SME or Plaintiff), a
Malaysian manufacturer of packaging products, comes before the Court to challenge
the Department of Commerce’s (Commerce) 2019-2020 Administrative Review of its
antidumping duty order on retail bags from Malaysia. Retail Carrier Bags from
Malaysia, 87 Fed. Reg. 12,933 (Dep’t of Com. Mar. 8, 2022). In its Motion for
Judgment on the Agency Record, Plaintiff argues that Commerce’s Final Results
must be remanded because substantial evidence does not support its findings. See
generally Pl.’s Br., ECF No 23. Euro SME alleges that the agency unlawfully relied
on facts available to adjust the actual weight quantities in Euro SME’s data. Id. at
7–11. It further contests Commerce’s reliance on an adverse inference to determine
certain inland freight expense data for U.S. sales that the agency deemed
unverifiable. Id. at 2–3. Finally, Euro SME contends that the agency should have
corrected a ministerial error that Plaintiff brought to its attention but that Commerce
rejected as untimely. Id. at 15–17. For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiff’s Motion
for Judgment on the Agency Record is DENIED; and Commerce’s Final Results are
SUSTAINED.
BACKGROUND
In August 2004, Commerce published an antidumping duty order on retail
carrier bags imported from Malaysia. Retail Carrier Bags from Malaysia, 69 Fed.
Reg. 48,203 (Dept. of Com. Aug. 9, 2004) (Order). The Order primarily covers the
ubiquitous plastic grocery bags that help shepherd our purchases home. Commerce
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 3
published its annual notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the
Order in August 2020. Notice of Opportunity, J.A. at 1,003–04, ECF No. 33; see also
19 U.S.C. § 1675(a)(1). In response, Defendant-Intervenor, the Polyethylene Retail
Carrier Bag Committee (the Committee), requested an administrative review of Euro
SME alleging that the company “may have produced or exported subject merchandise
that was sold into the United States at less than fair value during the period of
review.” Req. for Admin. Review, J.A. at 1,000–02, ECF No. 33. Commerce confirmed
that it would conduct an administrative review of Euro SME’s activities between
August 1, 2019 and July 31, 2020. Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Admin. Reviews, 85 Fed. Reg. 63,081–94 (Dep’t of Com. Oct. 6, 2020).
On October 26, 2020, Commerce sent a letter to Euro SME informing the
company that it was initiating an investigation into whether it had imported or
produced merchandise that was then sold in the United States for less than fair value.
Notice of Investigation at 1–4, J.A. at 1,050–53, ECF No. 33. Commerce explained
that a failure to respond to the request for information “may result in the application
of partial or total facts available, pursuant to section 776(a) of the Act, which may
include adverse inferences, pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act.” Id. at 3–4, J.A. at
1,052–53. Attached to the letter was a questionnaire, comprised of five parts, which
Commerce requested Euro SME complete as part of the review. Initial
Questionnaire, J.A. at 1,050–1,207, ECF No. 33. The questions reflected the type of
information the agency would need in order to conduct a comparison of Euro SME’s
sales in its home market of Malaysia and the United States.
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 4
The method that Commerce used to run that analysis was the “average-to-
average method.” Prelim. Determination Memo at 3, J.A. at 1,845, ECF No. 33; see
also 19 C.F.R. § 351.414(b)(1). The average-to-average method is one of the three
approved methodologies for Commerce to compare subject companies’ sales in their
home market and in the United States. 19 C.F.R. § 351.414(b). The purpose of the
comparison is to determine whether the subject merchandise is being sold in the
United States for less than fair value. Of the three approved methods, the agency
employs the average-to-average approach “unless [Commerce] determines another
method is appropriate in a particular case.” 19 C.F.R. § 351.414(c)(1); see also
Dillinger France S.A. v. United States, 981 F.3d 1318, 1324 n.5 (Fed. Cir. 2020). The
average-to-average method is conducted by “compar[ing] the weighted average of the
respondent’s sales prices in its home country during the investigation period to the
weighted average of the respondent’s sales prices in the United States during the
same period.” Stupp Corp. v. United States, 5 F.4th 1341, 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2021); see
also 19 C.F.R. § 351.414(d)(1). To perform the calculation, Commerce must first
collect the company’s cost and sales data for both the home market and the United
States.
Commerce sent its initial questionnaire on October 26, 2020. Notice of
Investigation at 1–4, J.A. at 1,050–53, ECF No. 33. Section B focused on the data
related to Euro SME’s home market sales; Section C posed the same questions
concerning the company’s sales in the United States; and Section D inquired about
the costs associated with the production of the subject merchandise. Id. at 1,055–57.
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 5
Initial Questionnaire Section B, C, D, J.A. at 1,080, 1,113, 1,149, ECF No. 33. In both
Sections B and C, Commerce instructed Euro SME to report “the sale quantity for
[each] transaction” and explained that the entry should be “the quantity of the
specific shipment or invoice line” of each corresponding sale. Id. at B-16, C-15, J.A.
at 1,097, 1,127. For all the data Euro SME submitted, Commerce also required the
company to provide supporting documentation. Id. at G-4, J.A. at 1,059. On the
instructions sheet, Commerce stated that the company was to “identify all units of
measurement” used in its “narrative response, worksheets, or other appendices” and
that it must “complete Appendix VII, which is a template providing a standard format
for reporting the units of measurement, currencies, and conversion factors.” Id. The
instructions also noted that “all information submitted may be subject to verification”
and that a “failure to allow full and complete verification of any information may
affect the consideration accorded to that or any other verified or non-verified item in
the responses.” Id. at G-9, J.A. at 1,064.
Euro SME provided timely responses to the questionnaire, submitting its
response to Section A on November 23, 2020, and to Sections B, C, and D on December
11, 2020. Euro SME Sect. A Resp., J.A. at 80,000, ECF No. 31; Euro SME Secs. BCD
Resps., J.A. at 80,307, ECF No. 31. In its narrative response explaining the
quantities and units of measurement for its sales data, Euro SME stated that it was
reporting both standard and actual weights in kilograms and that they included “both
for reconciliation purposes[.]” Secs. BCD Resp. at 14, J.A. at 80,326, ECF No. 31.
Euro SME added that it “also reported quantity in cartons … and quantity in 1,000
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 6
bags[.]” Id. The company provided the same narrative explanation in Section C when
asked about the quantities of its sales in the United States. Id. at 34, J.A. at 80,346.
At oral argument, counsel for Euro SME explained the difference between the figures.
“Standard weight” refers to an approximated weight of the bags “based on the
thickness, the length, the width, the depth of the bag” and other metrics; while “actual
weight” refers to exactly that — the weight of the bags when those bags are weighed.
Oral Arg. Tr. at 18:4–8, 21:15–18, ECF No. 46. However, Euro SME explained that
the “actual weights” it submitted were not based on a literal weighing of each carton,
as the definition of the term would suggest. Instead, the company weighed a single
carton from each shipment and then multiplied the weight of that one carton by the
total number of cartons in the sale to arrive at the “actual weight.” Id. at 22:8-16.
The data Plaintiff proffered as “actual weight” was therefore an average based on a
random sampling rather than the actual weight of the product for each sale.
When supplying its standard weight and “actual weight” data, Euro SME did
not make any objection to Commerce’s request for “the quantity of the specific
shipment[,]” nor did it express any concern about its ability to provide the requested
data. Sec. BCD Resp. at 14, 34, J.A. at 80,326, 80,346, ECF No. 31; see also Issues
and Decision Memo (IDM) at 8, J.A. at 2,165, ECF No. 33 (“At Commerce’s request,
Euro SME reported the actual weight for each transaction even though it does not
record that information during the ordinary course of business. There was no
indication in the record prior to verification that there may be an issue with Euro
SME’s reporting[.]”). At the end of the narrative portion of Section BCD of the
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 7
questionnaire, Euro SME provided Commerce with a series of attachments and
supporting documentation. Exhibit 1 contained Euro SME’s Home Market Sales
Listing, and Exhibit 8 contained its U.S. Sales Listing. In both exhibits, it provided
four measurements for the quantity of sales in the respective markets: standard
weight, actual weight, number of cartons, and per 1,000 bags. Sec. BCD Resp. at Ex.
1, Ex. 8, J.A. at 80,396–403, 80,439–53, ECF No. 31. On September 2, 2021,
Commerce published its Preliminary Results and Preliminary Decision Memo (PDM).
Retail Carrier Bags from Malaysia, 86 Fed. Reg. 49,309 (Dep’t of Com. Sept. 2, 2021)
(Preliminary Results); Preliminary Issues and Decision Memo (Dep’t of Com. Aug.
27, 2021), J.A. 1,843–53, ECF No. 33. It calculated a dumping margin of 0.00% and
concluded that “sales of polyethylene retail carrier bags … were not made at less than
normal value during the period of review[.]” Preliminary Results, 86 Fed. Reg. at
49,309.
In lieu of performing an on-site verification, Commerce sent Euro SME a
verification questionnaire (ILOV) on October 21, 2021, requesting documentation to
support the information the company had reported earlier, including the quantities
of its merchandise sold and its freight costs. ILOV Request for Information, J.A. at
81,836–42, ECF No. 31. To verify the sales data, Commerce randomly selected six
transactions — three from the Unites States and three from Malaysia — and
requested Euro SME provide supporting documents and a narrative explanation for
each transaction to verify the data that it had already submitted related to those
sales. Id. at 81,838–40. To verify the freight costs, Commerce requested supporting
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 8
documentation to explain how the company recorded its freight expenses in two
different selected U.S. sales and two different Malaysian sales. Id. at 81,840. Euro
SME submitted its response on October 28, 2021. ILOV Resp., J.A. at 81,843–82,224,
ECF No. 31. It stated that the attached invoices contained the quantity information
in terms of the number of cartons and per one thousand bags. Another attachment,
labeled “loading advice,” provided “support for quantity in kilograms (actual
weight)[.]” Id. at 3, J.A. at 81,851. The company similarly explained that another
“loading advice” document contained quantity information about the relevant
merchandise “with actual weight,” in response to questions about its freight expenses.
Id. at 6, J.A. at 81,854. The attachments included handwritten calculations. Id. at
Ex. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, J.A. at 81,889, 81,934, 81,972, 82,015, 82,036, 82,061, ECF No. 31.
Although the documents themselves did not explain how the weights of each sale
broke down within the shipment, the handwritten calculations attempted to do so.
Id. Once again, Euro SME did not express a concern about its ability to provide the
requested information. See generally ILOV Resp., J.A. at 81,843–82,224, ECF No.
31. Plaintiff’s counsel explained at oral argument that those loading documents were
where the employee in charge of calculating the actual weight recorded the weight of
each shipment. She clarified that the handwritten notations were the employee’s
calculations “extrapolating” from the weight of a single box in the shipment the
weight of the entire sale by multiplying the weight of the box by the total number of
boxes. Oral Arg. Tr. at 25:11–26:20, ECF No. 46.
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 9
For five of the six documents, the weight of the overall shipment listed on the
document differed from what Euro SME had originally told Commerce in its
questionnaire response. See IDM at 6, J.A. at 2,163, ECF No. 33; ILOV Resp. at Ex.
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, J.A. at 81,889, 81,934, 81,972, 82,015, 82,036, 82,061, ECF No. 31. In
those five cases, the handwritten notes attributed the entirety of the discrepancy to
the sales in the shipment that Commerce was not spot-checking. See IDM at 6–7,
J.A. at 2,163–64, ECF No. 33; ILOV Resp. at Ex. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, J.A. at 81,889, 81,934,
81,972, 82,015, 82,036, 82,061, ECF No. 31. For the sales Commerce was spot-
checking, the handwritten numbers matched what Euro SME originally told
Commerce down to the hundredth of a kilogram; but the sales Commerce was not
spot-checking were off by tens or hundreds of kilograms. See IDM at 6, J.A. at 2,163,
ECF No. 33; ILOV Resp. at Ex. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, J.A. at 81,889, 81,934, 81,972, 82,015,
82,036, 82,061, ECF No. 31; Pet’r’s Case Br. at Att. 1, J.A. at 82,239–40, ECF No. 31
(chart comparing reported figures to verification exhibits).
The story was similar when Commerce tried to verify Euro SME’s inland
freight expenses. Commerce chose to spot-check the same six sales it used to verify
actual weight, plus an additional two home market sales. IDM at 9, J.A. at 2,166,
ECF No. 33. All five home market sales differed between the verification
documentation and what Euro SME originally reported to Commerce. Id. at 10–11,
J.A. at 2,167–68; Pet’r’s Case Br. at Att. 2, J.A. at 82,241–43, ECF No. 31 (chart
comparing reported figures to verification exhibits). Again, the verification
documents attributed all discrepancies to sales Commerce was not spot-checking and
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 10
reported a perfect match for the transactions Commerce was spot-checking. IDM at
10–11, J.A. at 2,167–68; Pet’r’s Case Br. at Att. 2, J.A. at 82,241–43, ECF No. 31
(chart comparing reported figures to verification exhibits). However, for four of the
five sales, the discrepancies were negligible and possibly attributable to rounding
decisions. IDM at 10–11, J.A. at 2,167–68.
Euro SME declined to submit a case brief in response to the Preliminary
Results. Def.’s Br. at 28 n.9, ECF No. 25. However, on December 13, 2021, the
Committee sent Commerce a case brief arguing that (1) “Commerce should apply
partial adverse facts available (‘AFA’) as a result of Euro SME’s inability to
substantiate reported sales quantities and inland freight expenses” and (2)
“Commerce should also correct a ministerial error in the preliminary margin program
by which freight revenue was double counted.” Pet’r’s Case Br., J.A. at 2,097–110,
ECF No. 33.
Euro SME then submitted a rebuttal brief, arguing that Commerce had
committed a ministerial error in its freight revenue cap calculation. J.A. at 82,244,
ECF No. 31. Because that issue had not been raised in the Committee’s brief,
Commerce “rejected that segment of Euro SME’s rebuttal brief on the ground that
the challenge was a standalone argument and not rebutting anything petitioners had
said.” Def.’s Resp. Br. at 28 n.9, ECF No. 25. On January 7, 2022, Euro SME
submitted a revised rebuttal brief focusing instead on its claim that the company
“ha[d] submitted ample and accurate information” and that “the discrepancies noted
by the Petitioners with regard to actual weight, which also affect[] Malaysian inland
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 11
freight, are small and immaterial.” Pl.’s Rebuttal Case Br. at 1, J.A. at 2,130, ECF
No. 33. Euro SME argued that any revisions to the Preliminary Results would be
“either unnecessary or should be limited in scope.” Id. It also asserted that, in the
absence of the verifiable actual weight data that the agency requested, Commerce
could have performed its calculation with the standard weight or number of bags data
that the company did provide. Id. at 10–15, J.A. at 2,139–44.
After consideration of both parties’ briefs, Commerce published its Final
Results and its accompanying Issues and Decision Memo. See IDM, J.A. at 2,158–
172, ECF No. 33; Retail Carrier Bags from Malaysia: Final Results of the Admin.
Dumping Review; 2019-2020, 87 Fed. Reg. 12,933–12,935 (Dep’t of Com. Sept. 2,
2021), J.A. at 2,173–75, ECF No. 33 (Final Results). The Final Results differed
significantly from the Preliminary Results, most notably in the conclusion that “Euro
SME Sdn. Bhd. made sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value (NV)
during the period of review (POR).” Final Results at 12,934, J.A. at 2,174, ECF No.
33. Commerce concluded that there was a 6.47% weighted dumping margin. Id. In
the accompanying Issues and Decision Memo, Commerce explained the three
adjustments that it made. See generally IDM, J.A. at 2,158–72, ECF No. 33.
The first adjustment concerned the calculation of Euro SME’s sales weight
data and the discrepancy that Commerce observed when it attempted to verify the
data. For those figures, Commerce decided that “it is appropriate to use facts
otherwise available in relation to Euro SME’s reporting of actual weight and for gross
unit price and sales expenses, which are reported on a per-kilogram actual weight
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 12
basis across both the home market and U.S. sales databases[.]” IDM at 7, J.A. at
2,164, ECF No. 33. This was because “there were discrepancies between the reported
actual weights and the ‘loading advice’ document for five of the six sales traces. Euro
SME did not explain how it allocated the total weight across the transactions covered
by the ‘loading advice’ documents.” Id. Commerce declined to draw any adverse
inference here. Despite the discrepancies, Commerce did not feel “that Euro SME
[had] failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to comply with
Commerce’s request for information.” Id.The second adjustment pertained to freight costs. IDM at 9, J.A. at 2,166.
Those figures fell into two categories: (1) inland freight expenses in the home market
of Malaysia (INLFTCH), incurred when merchandise moved from the manufacturer
to the distribution warehouse, and (2) U.S. inland freight expenses (DINLFTPU),
incurred between the manufacturing plant and the port of exportation. Id. For each
category, Commerce requested documentation to verify the figures that Euro SME
initially submitted. ILOV Questionnaire, J.A. at 81,838–40, ECF No. 31. The
documents it provided failed to explain how the company allocated the costs between
those sales and why certain deductions appeared on the company’s summary pages.
IDM at 9–10, J.A. at 2,166–67, ECF No. 33. Commerce also asked for supporting
documentation on two additional Malaysian sales, and Euro SME’s response to that
request contained the same shortcomings. In both cases, Euro SME provided
handwritten notations on the supporting documents that attempted to attribute all
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 13
discrepancies in the data to sales that the agency had not selected for verification.
Id. at 10, J.A. at 2,167.
Despite those discrepancies, Commerce once again declined to apply adverse
inferences against Euro SME when filling the gaps related to home market inland
freight expenses associated with the three transactions it selected for spot-checking.
It explained, “[i]n the three home market sales traces, the variance between what
was reported in the database and the supporting documentation is very small, and
we find that the variance could plausibly be the result of rounding.” Id. at 10, J.A. at
2,167. Commerce also found “no basis to apply facts available to [the inland freight
expenses] throughout the home market database because the variances between the
supporting documentation and what was reported in the database appear largely
immaterial.” Id. at 11, J.A. at 2,168. However, with regard to one of the two
additional home market transactions, the agency did “find it appropriate to apply
facts available to the transactions … given that the size of that variance cannot be
explained by rounding, and there is no explanation regarding that variance on the
record.” Id. Though Commerce opted to apply facts available to that single sale, it
once again did “not find that Euro SME failed to cooperate to the best of its ability”
and therefore did “not find that the application of an adverse inference [was]
warranted[.]” Id.For inland freight costs for U.S. sales, however, Commerce agreed with the
Committee’s position and applied an adverse inference. The agency justified this
because “Euro SME failed to cooperate to the best of its abilities” by (1) continuing
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 14
“to report domestic inland freight expenses that did not correspond to the underlying
documentation on the record even after Commerce notified Euro SME that there were
discrepancies in its reporting” and (2) not properly explaining how it allocated the
charges on its freight invoices among the selected transactions. Id. at 14, J.A. at
2,171. Commerce therefore “increased all reported domestic inland freight expenses
… by the largest percent variance calculated on an exhibit-wide basis among the
three U.S. sales traces.” Id.The third adjustment that Commerce made between the Preliminary and Final
Results was the correction of a ministerial error highlighted by the Committee in its
case brief. Pet’r’s Case Br. at 12, J.A. at 2,108, ECF No. 33. Commerce agreed that,
in calculating its Preliminary Results, it had “double-counted freight revenue in the
calculation of net U.S. price[.]” IDM at 14, J.A. at 2,171, ECF No. 33. The agency
corrected its mistake, replacing the gross unit price variable that was inclusive of
freight revenue to one that excluded freight revenue. Id.After Commerce published the Final Results, Euro SME filed its own
ministerial error allegation. Allegation of Ministerial Error at 1, J.A. at 82,766, ECF
No. 31. Euro SME repeated the claim it originally made in its rebuttal brief, arguing
that Commerce had mistakenly excluded certain logistic expenses from its U.S.
freight revenue expense cap. Id. at 2, J.A. at 82,767. In its letter to Commerce, Euro
SME asserted that “setting the cap at just international freight … would erroneously
omit [a large percentage] of the freight costs associated with moving the product to
the U.S. customer[.]” Id. at 4, J.A. at 82,797. Because Commerce had “performed the
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 15
same freight revenue cap calculation” in its Preliminary Results and Euro SME failed
to raise the issue until after publication of the Final Results, Commerce rejected the
allegation as untimely. Commerce Resp. to Ministerial Error Allegation at 3–4, J.A.
at 2,226–27, ECF No. 33. Citing 19 C.F.R. § 351.224(c)(1) and 19 C.F.R. §
351.309(c)(2), it explained that the alleged error was “discoverable earlier in the
proceeding” and therefore should have been raised in Plaintiff’s case brief. Id. Euro
SME’s decision to not submit a case brief forfeited the issue. Id. at 3.
The Court held oral argument on May 12, 2023. ECF No. 39. Plaintiff clarified
that it did not challenge Commerce’s use of a verification questionnaire in lieu of an
on-site verification despite extensive discussion of that decision in its briefs. Oral
Arg. Tr. 7:3-22, ECF No. 46 (stating that “we do not contest the use of the ILOV …
questionnaire”). The Committee confirmed that it had not filed a cross-complaint or
in any other way challenged Commerce’s decision to resort to facts available rather
than draw an adverse inference. Id. at 8:15-20. Plaintiff’s counsel also clarified that
she was not challenging Commerce’s inland freight calculations for Euro SME’s home
market sales. Id. at 58:7-14 (when asked to confirm that Euro SME was “not objecting
to what [Commerce] did” in calculating one of the home market freight expenses,
responding “we are not.”). Finally, the parties gave their consent for the Court to
consider prior administrative reviews of Euro SME despite those reviews not being
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 16
formally admitted into the record. Id. at 11:7-16; see also 44 U.S.C. § 1507 (“The
contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed[.]”).1
On the issue of Euro SME’s quantity data, however, the parties were not able
to agree on (1) whether Euro SME’s standard weight submissions had been verified;
(2) whether it would have been possible for Commerce to perform its calculations with
the standard weights that Plaintiff submitted; and (3) whether there was a “gap” in
the record for Commerce to fill. On those questions, the Court ordered the parties to
submit supplemental briefing. ECF No. 38.
Euro SME submitted its letter brief on June 5, 2023. Pl.’s Supp. Br., ECF No.
41. It first asserted that its standard weights had been verified because neither
Commerce nor the Committee challenged the data. Id. at 3. Next, Euro SME argued
that the verified standard weights could have been used in Commerce’s entire
calculation because the agency already used standard weights in its below cost test,
disproving Commerce’s claim that “it was impossible or impractical to use standard
weights in its calculations.” Id. at 3–5. Euro SME concluded that, under the Federal
Circuit’s opinion in Zhejiang DunAn Hetian Metal Co. v. United States, Commerce
could not resort to facts available because there was no “gap” to be filled. Id. at 8
(citing 652 F.3d 1333, 1346 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (“The use of facts otherwise available …
1 The parties agreed that the Court could take judicial notice of the existence of prior
administrative investigations to which Euro SME had been subject, as those documents are
publicly available. However, the full administrative records associated with the
investigations were not formally placed onto the record and are not considered in this matter.
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 17
is only appropriate to fill gaps when Commerce must rely on other sources of
information to complete the factual record.”)) (internal citations omitted).
The Government submitted its response on June 22, 2023. Def.’s Supp. Br.,
ECF No. 44. It argued that standard weight figures were not provided for all the data
points that were requested and were necessary to complete Commerce’s calculation.
Commerce claimed that Euro SME reported its sales expenses in both the Malaysian
and U.S. markets only on an actual weight basis — figures that proved to be
unverifiable. Id. at 4. With “no other usable metrics available on the record” for those
data points, the Government argued that Commerce faced a “gap” and lawfully relied
on facts available. Id. at 5. In its brief, the Committee added that a “conversion” of
all the figures to standard weights — as Plaintiff proposed — would have been
impossible without “an actual quantity field,” which Commerce had determined “at
verification to be unreliable.” Def.-Int.’s Supp. Br. at 2, ECF No. 47. With these
clarifications, the Court applies the law.
JURISDICTION AND STANDARD OF REVIEW
This Court has jurisdiction over the Plaintiff’s challenge of Commerce’s Final
Results in its Administrative Review under 19 U.S.C. § 1516a(a)(2)(B)(iii) and 28
U.S.C. § 1581(c). The Court must sustain Commerce’s “determinations, findings, or
conclusions” unless they are “unsupported by substantial evidence on the record, or
otherwise not in accordance with the law.” 19 U.S.C. § 1516a(b)(1)(B)(i). Where they
fail to meet that standard, the Court must “hold unlawful any determination, finding,
or conclusion found.” Id. As this Court has articulated, “the question is not whether
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 18
the Court would have reached the same decision on the same record[;] rather, it is
whether the administrative record as a whole permits Commerce’s conclusion.” See
New American Keg v. United States, No. 20–00008, 2021 WL 1206153, at *6 (CIT
Mar. 23, 2021). Furthermore, “the possibility of drawing two inconsistent conclusions
from the evidence does not prevent an administrative agency’s finding from being
supported by substantial evidence.” Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. United States, 750
F.2d 927, 933 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
In reviewing agency determinations, findings, or conclusions for substantial
evidence, the Court assesses whether the agency action is reasonable given the record
as a whole. Nippon Steel Corp. v. United States, 458 F.3d 1345, 1350–51 (Fed. Cir.
2006); see also Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, 340 U.S. 474, 488 (1951) (“The
substantiality of evidence must take into account whatever in the record fairly
detracts from its weight.”). The Federal Circuit has described “substantial evidence”
as “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support
a conclusion.” DuPont Teijin Films USA v. United States, 407 F.3d 1211, 1215 (Fed.
Cir. 2005) (quoting Consol. Edison Co. v. NLRB, 305 U.S. 197, 229 (1938)).
DISCUSSION
Plaintiff Euro SME argues that Commerce’s Final Results should be remanded
based on the agency’s unlawful application of facts otherwise available and adverse
inferences. First, Euro SME challenges Commerce’s adjustment of the actual weight
figures. Pl.’s Br. at 7, ECF No. 23. Second, Plaintiff claims that Commerce’s
application of adverse inferences to the domestic inland freight costs for U.S. sales
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 19
was unlawful. Id. at 10. Third, Euro SME alleges that Commerce’s calculation of the
company’s domestic freight costs reflected a ministerial error. Id. at 15. Euro SME
claims that it fully cooperated with the agency’s requests throughout the
investigation and that any discrepancies in its data were because the company does
not maintain records in the form that the agency requested. Id. at 7; Pl.’s Reply Br.
at 1–3, ECF No. 28. Euro SME further explains that the agency’s decision to forego
an on-site verification and instead issue a verification questionnaire hampered its
ability to clarify any discrepancies. Pl.’s Reply Br. at 9–10, ECF No. 28. Nonetheless,
the company does not challenge the legality of Commerce’s use of a questionnaire.
Oral Arg. Tr. 7:3-22, ECF No. 46. Finally, Euro SME disputes Commerce’s finding
that there was a “gap” in the record to fill with either facts otherwise available or an
adverse inference. Though some of its figures may have contained errors, the
company maintains that the same information was provided in different units of
measurement and that Commerce could have used that data to complete its
calculation. Pl.’s Br. at 12–15, ECF No. 23; see also Pl.’s Supp. Br. at 3–8, ECF No.
41.
I. SUMMARY
To determine whether Euro SME was selling its subject merchandise at less
than fair value in the United States, Commerce conducted its investigation using the
“average-to-average” method. PDM at 3, J.A. at 1,845, ECF No. 33. That method is
essentially calculating and then comparing the “weighted average” of the company’s
home market and U.S. sales. 19 C.F.R. § 351.414(d). The data that Commerce draws
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 20
from in performing its calculation is the data that it receives from responding
companies. The questionnaires that Commerce sends companies under investigation
identify what data it needs and in what form. Companies that have been subject to
regular administrative reviews become familiar with the types of information they
are expected to keep and provide to the agency. Euro SME and its predecessor
company, Euro Plastics, have been subject to regular administrative reviews since
2007. 2
When Commerce determines that parties have failed to provide information
necessary for its analysis such that information is missing from the record, federal
law provides a two-part process for the agency to fill the resulting gap. See 19 U.S.C.
§ 1677e(a). First, Commerce may use “facts otherwise available” in place of the
missing information if:
(1) Necessary information is not available on the record, or
(2) An interested party or any other person —
(A) Withholds information that has been requested by [Commerce],
(B) Fails to provide such information by the deadlines for submission
of the information or in the form and manner requested, …
(C) Significantly impedes a proceeding under this subtitle, or
2 Although these prior administrative reviews were not formally entered onto the record, the
parties agreed at oral argument that the Court could take judicial notice of them for the
limited purpose of confirming Plaintiff’s participation in prior reviews. Oral Arg. Tr. at 9:15–
11:16, ECF No. 46; see, eg., Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags from Malaysia: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review 2005-2006, 72 Fed. Reg. 44,825 (Dep’t of Com. Aug.
9, 2007) through Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags from Malaysia: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review 2018-2019, 86 Fed. Reg. 22,019 (Dep’t of Com. Apr.
26, 2021).
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 21
(D) Provides such information but the information cannot be
verified[.]
Id. Second, 19 U.S.C. § 1677e(b) permits those facts otherwise available to be chosen
with an adverse inference if “an interested party has failed to cooperate by not acting
to the best of its ability to comply with a request for information from [Commerce].”
Although § 1677e(a) and § 1677e(b) are often collapsed into “adverse facts available”
or “AFA,” the two statutory processes require distinct analyses rather than the single
analysis implied by the term “AFA.” Commerce first must determine that it is
missing necessary information; and, if it wishes to fill the resulting gap with facts
that reflect an adverse inference against an interested party, Commerce must
secondarily determine that the party has failed to cooperate by not acting to the best
of its ability. See Zhejiang DunAn Hetian Metal Co., 652 F.3d at 1346. The Federal
Circuit has explained that acting to the best of one’s ability involves using “maximum
effort to provide Commerce with full and complete answers to all inquiries in [its]
investigation.” Nippon Steel Corp. v. United States, 337 F.3d 1373, 1382 (Fed. Cir.
2003). It also requires companies to “take reasonable steps to keep and maintain full
and complete records” of their transactions in anticipation of Commerce’s
administrative reviews. Id.; see also Qingdao Sea-Line Int’l Trading Co. v. United
States, 503 F. Supp. 3d 1355, 1371 (CIT 2021). A company that has been subject to
many investigations becomes familiar with the types of information Commerce needs,
making it more difficult to justify a failure to provide the requested information in
the manner Commerce has consistently requested it. Compare Def.’s Br. at 15, ECF
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 22
No. 25 (describing the number of annual administrative reviews Euro SME has been
subject to and, in turn, the company’s familiarity with the process), with Nippon Steel
Corp., 337 F.3d at 1382 (stating that “inattentiveness, carelessness, or inadequate
record keeping” all constitute non-compliance and that the standard “assumes that
importers are familiar with the rules and regulations that apply to the import
activities undertaken and requires that importers … take reasonable steps to keep
and maintain full and complete records documenting the information that a
reasonable importer should anticipate being called upon to produce[.]”).
In response to Commerce’s initial questionnaire and each of its subsequent
requests for information, Euro SME proffered timely submissions that appeared
responsive. Only at verification did it emerge that the data Euro SME submitted
contained errors and discrepancies. After determining that Euro SME’s actual
weight and inland freight data were unverifiable, Commerce was left with numerous
gaps in the record. Commerce gave Euro SME opportunities to provide it with
verifiable data, but Euro SME failed to do so. The agency’s reliance on facts available
therefore was lawful under the statute. See 19 U.S.C. § 1677e(a).
Commerce then had to consider whether it would go the further step of
applying an adverse inference based on a finding of non-cooperation. As Commerce
explained in its Issues and Decision Memo, it found that most discrepancies in Euro
SME’s data did not “rise to the level of warranting an adverse inference.” IDM at 8,
J.A. at 2,165, ECF No. 33. However, with one set of figures — the inland freight costs
for United States sales — the agency found otherwise. The divergence between the
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 23
data from the company’s records and its verification responses combined with an
apparent effort to mask those discrepancies constituted a “fail[ure] to cooperate”
warranting the application of an adverse inference. Id. at 11–14, J.A. at 2,168–71;
see 19 U.S.C. § 1677e(b)(1) (allowing the drawing of an adverse inference where a
party “has failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to comply with a
request for information”). Commerce’s limited finding of non-cooperation regarding
specific discrepancies in Euro SME’s submission was similarly lawful. It adequately
explained in the Issues and Decision Memo what distinguished those discrepancies
from others where it declined to apply an adverse inference. IDM at 13, J.A. at 2,170,
ECF No. 33. Because Commerce’s actions were supported by substantial evidence,
the Court will SUSTAIN Commerce’s determination.
II. COMMERCE’S RELIANCE ON FACTS OTHERWISE AVAILABLE
Under the statute, Commerce may “use the facts otherwise available” in an
administrative review if information is not available on the record or if a party
withholds requested information, fails to provide information “in the form and
manner requested,” significantly impedes the review, or if the information cannot be
verified. 19 U.S.C. § 1677e(a). The existence of a “gap” in the record, such that
Commerce must look elsewhere for the information, is a prerequisite for the use of
facts otherwise available. Zhejiang DunAn Hetian Metal Co., 652 F.3d at 1346.
Euro SME argues that none of the preconditions required by the statute are
present here because the data that the company provided, though imperfect, could
have been used to calculate the company’s margins. Pl.’s Reply Br. at 8–9, ECF No.
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 24
28; Oral Arg. Tr. at 29:6-10, ECF No. 46. According to Euro SME, “there were no
gaps in the data, just several different versions of the data presented in different
forms in accordance with Commerce’s various requirements” so that Commerce was
not permitted to use facts otherwise available. Pl.’s Reply Br. at 8–9, ECF No. 28. At
oral argument, Plaintiff conceded that “there’s a gap on the record with regard to
actual weight” but maintained that, because it provided the same information in
other forms, i.e., in standard weight and number of bags, “the Department could have
used that information and avoided” any gap. Oral Arg. Tr. at 29:6-10, ECF No. 46.
The Government responds that Plaintiff’s unverifiable data created a gap that needed
to be filled by the agency in order to complete its calculations. Id. at 31:4–32:8.
Both parties reiterate these positions in their supplemental briefing. Euro
SME argues that it is in the same position as the plaintiff in Zhejiang and that no
“gap” existed for Commerce to fill. See Zhejiang DunAn Hetian Metal Co., 652 F.3d
at 1348. The Government contests that claim, arguing that several data sets, such
as sales expenses in both the Malaysian and U.S. markets, were reported only on an
actual weight basis and proved unverifiable. Def.’s Supp. Br. at 4–5, ECF No. 44.
The Government explains:
[F]or sales expenses, Euro SME reported its relevant
numbers … solely on a per-kilogram actual weight basis ….
That is similarly true for the gross unit price variable,
which Euro SME reported only on an actual weight and per
carton basis …. The consistent metric unifying these sales-
related variables is that Euro SME reported those
expenses to Commerce using actual weight …. Thus, when
Commerce was unable to verify the actual weight data that
Euro SME had provided in support of these responses, it
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 25
concluded that there was a gap in the record that prevented
it from conducting its calculations[.]
Id. (emphasis in the original); see also IDM at 5–8, J.A. at 2,162–2,165, ECF No. 33.
In Zhejiang, the Federal Circuit held that Commerce’s reliance on facts
available was unlawful — despite the discrepancies in the company’s records —
because the data Commerce needed in verifiable form was available elsewhere in the
record. Thus, the Federal Circuit held there was no “gap” to fill; the agency simply
had to look elsewhere in the company’s submissions to find the data it needed.
Zhejiang, 652 F.3d at 1348. Here, as the agency explained in its Issues and Decision
Memo, its reliance on facts available was a result of its inability to perform the margin
calculation because of an absence of verifiable data.
In its initial questionnaire, Commerce requested data related to the quantities
of merchandise Euro SME sold in the United States and in the company’s Malaysian
home market. Initial Questionnaire, J.A. at 1,050–1,207, ECF No. 33. Euro SME
responded with various documents from both markets, including sample invoices and
packing lists. Euro SME Sec. A Resp. at Ex. 1, 6, 7, J.A. at 80,028, 80,046–63, ECF
No. 31. What the invoices reflect is that Euro SME quantifies its merchandise by the
number of units (bags), the number of cartons, and the number of units in each carton.
Euro SME Sec. A Resp. at Ex. 6, 7, J.A. at 80,047, 80,053, ECF No. 31; see also Pl.’s
Brief at 8, ECF No. 23. Weight does not appear on the invoices because “Euro SME
does not sell to the customer by weight in any way[.]” Pl.’s Br. at 8, ECF No. 23.
However, weight does appear on the company’s packing lists. Plaintiff explains that
the weights that appear on those documents are calculated by multiplying the
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 26
“standard weight per carton” by the number of cartons in the sale — not by
individually weighing each carton. Id. Standard weight therefore represents, at best,
an average. Euro SME provided Commerce with actual weights, but those actual
weights also were more of an average. It weighed one carton from each sale shipment
and multiplied that weight by the total number of cartons in the shipment to arrive
at the “actual weight.” Id. at 10; Oral Arg. Tr. at 22:8-16, ECF No. 46. Euro SME
concedes that “variations between standard weight and actual weight can result in
discrepancies to some degree, since actual weights and standard weights may
differ[.]” Pl.’s Br. at 11, ECF No. 23. However, the company insists that “on an
aggregate basis” those discrepancies are “immaterial” and do not evince any “attempt
by Euro SME to manipulate or misrepresent its reported quantity information[.]” Id.
Although it may be true that Commerce could have conducted its calculation
with a full and verifiable dataset of either the actual or standard weight, it had
neither. Instead, the agency had some data in the form of standard and actual weight
and other data only in terms of actual weight, which proved impossible to verify. IDM
at 6–8, J.A. at 2,163–65, ECF No. 33 (discussing which units Commerce had for each
data set, and which of those data sets the agency was able to verify). No conversion
ratio appears in the record, meaning that Commerce could not convert unverifiable
data into a different measurement unit such as standard weight or number of bags.
Id. at 8, J.A. at 2,165; Def.’s Br. at 14–15, ECF No. 25; see also Oral Arg. Tr. at 44:13–
45:1, ECF No. 46. Euro SME is an experienced participant in administrative reviews.
That is why it sought to proffer its data in terms of actual weight without being
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 27
prompted by Commerce: It was the same metric requested and used in past reviews.
Def.’s Br. at 15, ECF No. 25. Compare Initial Questionnaire at B-16–17, J.A. at
1,097–98, ECF No. 33 (Commerce requesting quantity data without any further
specification), with Initial Questionnaire Resp. at 14, J.A. 1,352, ECF No. 33 (Euro
SME providing the data in “actual weight”). Experienced respondents are expected
to maintain their books in a manner that permits Commerce to glean the necessary
data for its analysis. Nippon Steel Corp. v. United States, 337 F.3d 1373, 1382 (Fed.
Cir. 2003). By its own admission, Euro SME failed to do so and instead sought to
use averages instead of actual weights. Oral Arg. Tr. at 25:11–26:20, ECF No. 46
(Plaintiff’s counsel explaining how the “actual weights” were calculated by
extrapolating from a single carton’s weight rather than weighing each carton.).
When Euro SME’s actual weight data failed to verify, Commerce had a gap to fill. See
19 U.S.C. § 1677e(a)(2)(D) (failure of information to verify permits Commerce to
resort to facts available). Because the actual weight figures proffered by Euro SME
proved unverifiable and no other complete data set appeared on the record that would
allow Commerce to convert the data into a consistent unit of measurement,
Commerce lawfully resorted to the use of facts available to adjust the actual weight
data. IDM at 6–8, J.A. at 2,163–65, ECF No. 33.
III. COMMERCE’S APPLICATION OF ADVERSE INERENCES TO
DOMESTIC INLAND FREIGHT COSTS FOR U.S. SALES
Under the statute, Commerce may only apply an adverse inference against a
party after first determining that there is a gap in the record and then separately
finding that the party has “failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 28
to comply with a request for information.” See 19 U.S.C. § 1677e(b). The inference
that Commerce draws must be selected “from among the facts otherwise available.”
Id. Commerce is not required to make any determination or adjustment “based on
any assumptions about information the interested party would have provided if the
interested party had complied with the request for information.” Id. § 1677e(b)(1)(B).
The Government argues that Euro SME’s repeated failure to provide verifiable
data for its inland freight costs associated with its United States sales justified its
application of an adverse inference under the statute. Commerce recalls that “Euro
SME’s domestic inland freight data for U.S. sales could not be verified” and that “Euro
SME had repeatedly failed to act to the best of its ability and seemingly tried to mask
material discrepancies between the figures it reported and its own back-up
documents.” Def.’s Br. at 7, ECF No. 25. Those allegations refer to Euro SME’s
response to the verification questionnaire and the supporting documents the
company offered to explain the data. Commerce found that the figures Euro SME
offered to support its data for the randomly selected sales did not match the numbers
the company proffered in its initial questionnaire response. IDM at 10, J.A. at 2,167,
ECF No. 33. Though the company offered “some narrative discussion of how the
documents supported what was reported in the database[,]” that explanation “fail[ed]
to explain how the freight costs were allocated to the associated transactions[.]” Id.
Commerce found that Euro SME attempted to mask material discrepancies with
handwritten notations that appeared on the attached supporting documents. Those
notations “assigned any variance to non-selected transactions so that the selected
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 29
transaction would appear consistent with Euro SME’s freight invoices[.]” Id. The
agency argues that the application of an adverse inference was appropriate because
Commerce had sent Euro SME “clear and repeated requests … to correct noted
discrepancies,” and Euro SME “made no serious effort” to do so. Def.’s Br. at 21–22,
ECF No. 25.
Euro SME disputes the allegation, claiming that “the administrative record is
replete with evidence that Euro SME cooperated to the best of its ability at all times
in the underlying administrative review[.]” Pl.’s Reply Br. at 3, ECF No. 28. It insists
that the circumstances surrounding the Covid-19 Pandemic, which prevented an on-
site verification, deprived the company of the opportunity to participate in a process
with the agency whereby “those gaps [in the record] could have been fully explained
and digested by Commerce officials[.]” Id. at 4. Plaintiff argues that “pre-verification
preparations routinely involve making notations (handwritten or otherwise) on
photocopies of sales and/or other internal records highlighting reconciling figures for
ease of reference and to expedite the on-site verification process.” Id. at 6. The
Government’s claims that the notations are indicative of an attempt to “mask” issues
in the company’s data reveals, according to Euro SME, “a fundamental
misunderstanding about how the on-site verification process usually works.” Id. at 5.
At oral argument, Euro SME clarified that it did not object to the agency’s use
of a verification questionnaire in lieu of an on-site verification but rather wanted to
highlight the inherent shortcomings of that alternative verification method. Oral
Arg. Tr. 7:3-22, ECF No. 46. It also clarified that its primary objection to the
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 30
application of adverse inferences to the U.S. sales data was the inconsistency with
Commerce’s finding that other, similar discrepancies that appeared in the home
market sales data did not demonstrate a failure to cooperate. Id. at 55:11-15; see also
id. at 57:24–58:23 (responding “[c]orrect” when asked if it was true that the company
highlighted the agency’s action to demonstrate that “the calculations for inland
freight expenses in the home market and what [they] did with domestic inland freight
expenses for United States sales [were] apples to apples … and yet [were] being
treated differently”). Plaintiff argues that this differential treatment — whereby one
discrepancy is found not to demonstrate a lack of cooperation while a similar
discrepancy with another data set warrants the drawing of an adverse inference —
constitutes an arbitrary and unlawful application of adverse inferences. Id.
In its Issues and Decision Memo, Commerce adequately explained the basis for
its differential treatment of the discrepancies that appeared in Euro SME’s inland
freight expenses for home market sales and the larger inconsistency that it found in
the U.S. sales data. Commerce explained, “Unlike the variances relating to inland
freight in the home market, which were generally very small or could be explained by
rounding differences, the variance between the supporting documentation and the
domestic inland freight expenses reported in the database for the three U.S. sales
traces were not immaterial.” IDM at 13, J.A. at 2,170, ECF No. 33. “Under the
arbitrary and capricious standard, the court … determine[s] whether an agency’s
decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors and whether there has
been a clear error of judgment.” Baroque Timber Indus. (Zhongshan) Co. v. United
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 31
States, 38 CIT 448, 456 n.27 (2014) (internal citations omitted). Here, Commerce
explained the basis for its differential treatment of the various discrepancies that
appeared in Euro SME’s data. Where discrepancies were small and could potentially
be explained by rounding, Commerce found drawing an adverse inference was
unwarranted. IDM at 10– 11, J.A. at 2,167– 68, ECF No. 33. Where the discrepancy
was larger, could not be explained by rounding, and included handwritten notations
that appeared designed to obscure the discrepancy’s origin, Commerce did apply an
adverse inference. Id. at 11–14, J.A. at 2,168–71. The Court finds that Commerce
considered all relevant factors, drew a rational distinction based on the relative size
of the discrepancies, and supported its determination with substantial evidence.
Consequently, the Court will not second guess Commerce’s application of an adverse
inference to the largest discrepancy within the U.S. freight expense data set.
IV. MINISTERIAL ERROR
The final issue for the Court’s review is Euro SME’s ministerial error
allegation. Pl.’s Br. at 15, ECF No. 23. 19 U.S.C. § 1675(h) requires Commerce to
“establish procedures for the correction of ministerial errors … [which] shall ensure
opportunity for interested parties to present their views regarding any such errors.”
The same statute defines a ministerial error as “an error in addition, subtraction, or
other arithmetic function, clerical error resulting from inaccurate copying,
duplication, or the like, and any other similar type of unintentional error[.]” Id.; see
also 19 C.F.R. § 351.224(f). Commerce’s regulations implementing the statute
mandate that “[c]omments concerning ministerial errors made in the preliminary
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 32
results of a review should be included in a party’s case brief.” 19 C.F.R. §
351.224(c)(1). Parties may submit case briefs to the agency “30 days after the date of
publication of the preliminary results of review[.]” 19 C.F.R. § 351.309(c)(1)(ii). “The
case brief must present all arguments that continue in the submitter’s view to be
relevant to the [agency’s] final determination[.]” Id. § (c)(2). Requiring ministerial
errors that appear in the preliminary results to be raised in the party’s case brief
ensures that other parties have an opportunity to respond to the allegation and that
Commerce is able to “analyze any comments received and, if appropriate, correct any
significant ministerial error by amending the preliminary determination or … the
final determination[.]” 19 C.F.R. § 351.224(e).
Euro SME declined to submit a case brief after Commerce’s publication of the
preliminary results. Def.’s Resp. Br. at 28 n.9, ECF No. 25. After the Committee
submitted a brief to the agency, however, Euro SME submitted a rebuttal brief in
which it responded to issues raised in the Committee’s brief and attempted to raise
for the first time its allegation of a ministerial error. Id.; see also J.A. at 82,244, ECF
No. 31. Because rebuttal briefs “may respond only to arguments raised in case briefs”
and are barred from raising new issues, Commerce rejected Euro SME’s submission
and required it to resubmit its rebuttal with the ministerial error allegation redacted.
See 19 C.F.R. § 351.309(d)(2). Following Commerce’s publication of the Final Results,
Euro SME again tried to raise its ministerial error allegation. On March 7, 2022, the
company submitted a brief alleging that Commerce erred in its Final Results by
capping the company’s freight revenue expenses. Commerce had only included the
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 33
international freight expenses associated with the reviewed transactions. Euro SME
Ministerial Error Memo at 2, J.A. at 82,767, ECF No. 31. Euro SME argued that it
should have also included the freight expenses incurred within the United States to
transport the goods to their final destination. Plaintiff’s data had included those
United States transportation expenses, and omitting the expenses resulted in a
deceptively low expense calculation from which to compare Plaintiff’s production
expenses. The result is a potentially inaccurately high dumping margin. Id.Commerce filed its response to the allegation on March 29, 2022, arguing that
Euro SME failed to raise the issue in a timely fashion and thereby forfeited the
objection. Commerce Resp. to Ministerial Error at 3–4, J.A. 2,226–27, ECF No. 33.
Citing 19 C.F.R. § 351.224(c)(1) and 19 C.F.R. § 351.309(c)(2), Commerce found that
parties alleging ministerial error in the preliminary results must do so in their case
briefs to the agency. Id. at 3, J.A. at 2,226. Euro SME declined to submit any initial
case brief following the agency’s publication of its Preliminary Results. That left Euro
SME only the post-Final Results process to raise its objection. Once again, the
complaint was untimely because 19 C.F.R. § 351.224(c)(1) requires parties to raise
any issues that are detectable in the Preliminary Results in their initial case briefs.
The Committee agrees with the Government that Euro SME’s failure to timely
raise its allegation constitutes forfeiture, but it also presents an alternative basis on
which to uphold Commerce’s decision. It argues that “the alleged error is not
‘ministerial’ in nature” but is instead “a factual and methodological question.” Def.-
Int.’s Br. at 10, ECF No. 27. Noting that ministerial errors can only be errors “in
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 34
addition, subtraction, or other arithmetic function, clerical error resulting from
inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like[,]” the Committee posits that Commerce’s
decision not to include certain categories of expenses cannot be a ministerial error.
See 19 C.F.R. § 351.224(f). Methodological choices are not unintentional errors and
therefore cannot be raised using the ministerial error process.
The Court agrees that the allegation was both untimely and not properly
characterized as “ministerial.” When faced with a similar question, the Federal
Circuit has held that the inclusion or exclusion of certain figures in a calculation that
are “not an arithmetic or clerical error or similar inadvertent mistake … do[] not fall
within the statutory definition of ‘ministerial error.’” QVD Food Co., Ltd. v. United
States, 658 F.3d 1318, 1328 (Fed. Cir. 2011). In QVD Food, the plaintiff filed a
ministerial error allegation following the publication of Commerce’s Final Results,
alleging that the agency had mistakenly “double counted” certain expenses in its
calculations. Id. at 1322. On appeal, the court rejected its allegation on two separate
grounds. First, the Federal Circuit held that, by failing to raise its concern regarding
Commerce’s calculation before the publication of the Final Results, QVD had forfeited
the issue. Id. at 1328. “[W]hen the alleged mistake was discoverable during earlier
proceedings but was not pointed out to Commerce during the time period specified by
regulation,” it may not be raised after the publication of the Final Results as a
ministerial error. See id. (noting that the alleged error was “necessarily present in
the preliminary results,” yet the plaintiff did not object in its case brief). Second, even
if QVD had not forfeited its claim, the Federal Circuit explained that the alleged error
Court No. 1:22-cv-00108 (SAV) Page 35
was not ministerial. Citing the statutory definition, it held that Commerce’s decision
to include certain figures in its calculation “is not an arithmetic or clerical error or
similar inadvertent mistake” and therefore could not qualify as a “ministerial error.”
Id.The present case is on all fours with QVD Foods. Like QVD, Euro SME
forfeited its allegation by opting not to file a case brief following Commerce’s
publication of the Preliminary Results. See id. (holding that, where an error is
discoverable in the Preliminary Results, parties must raise it in their brief to
Commerce). However, even if Euro SME had timely field its allegation, its claim
would still fail because the methodological decision made by Commerce to exclude
certain costs in its calculations is not “an arithmetic or clerical error or similar
inadvertent mistake[.]” 3 See id. (holding that “methodological” choices are not
ministerial errors). As both grounds support Commerce’s rejection of Euro SME’s
allegation, the Court SUSTAINS Commerce’s determination.
CONCLUSION
Euro SME alleges that Commerce threw the book at it. Instead, Commerce
acted with deliberation, patience, and arguably stayed its hand when it could have
drawn adverse inferences more broadly against such a seasoned respondent. For the
reasons set forth above, the Court SUSTAINS Commerce’s Final Results as
3 Consideration of whether the allegation made by Euro SME constitutes a “ministerial error”
is resolvable as a pure question of law because the question is purely legal in nature, requires
no further development of the record or any additional agency action, and it does not result
in undue delay or expenditure of resources. See Saha Thai Steel Pipe Pub. Co., Ltd. v. United
States, 605 F. Supp. 3d 1348, 1366 (CIT 2022); see also Husteel Co. v. United States, 426 F.
Supp 3d 1376, 1382 n.5 (CIT 2020).
6OLS2S1R
UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE


(85260(6'1%+'

Plaintiff

Y

81,7('67$7(6
%HIRUH6WHSKHQ$OH[DQGHU9DGHQ

-XGJH
 Defendant,


&RXUW1RFY 6$9 
and

32/<(7+</(1( 5(7$,/ &$55,(5
%$*&200,77((+,/(;32/<&2
//&DQG683(5%$*&253

Defendant-Intervenors

OPINION


>6XVWDLQLQJ&RPPHUFH·V)LQDO'HWHUPLQDWLRQ@

         'DWHG)HEUXDU\

Kelly Slater $SSOHWRQ/XII3WH/WGRI:DVKLQJWRQ'&IRU3ODLQWLII(XUR60(6GQ
%KG:LWKKHURQWKHEULHIZHUHJay Y. NeeDQGEdmund W. Sim

Meen Geu Oh6HQLRU7ULDO&RXQVHO86'HSDUWPHQWRI-XVWLFHRI:DVKLQJWRQ'&
IRU 'HIHQGDQW 8QLWHG 6WDWHV :LWK KLP RQ WKH EULHI ZHUH Brendan S. Saslow DQG
Kenneth G. Kays2I&RXQVHO86'HSDUWPHQWRI&RPPHUFH

Daniel L. Schneiderman.LQJ 6SDOGLQJ//3RI:DVKLQJWRQ'&IRU'HIHQGDQW
,QWHUYHQRUV 3RO\HWK\OHQH 5HWDLO &DUULHU %DJ &RPPLWWHH +LOH[ 3RO\ &R //& DQG
6XSHUEDJ&RUS:LWKKLPRQWKHEULHIZDVJ. Michael Taylor
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
Vaden, Judge 3ODLQWLII (XUR 60( 6GQ %KG (XUR 60( RU 3ODLQWLII  D
0DOD\VLDQPDQXIDFWXUHURISDFNDJLQJSURGXFWVFRPHVEHIRUHWKH&RXUWWRFKDOOHQJH
WKH'HSDUWPHQWRI&RPPHUFH·V &RPPHUFH $GPLQLVWUDWLYH5HYLHZRILWV
DQWLGXPSLQJ GXW\ RUGHU RQ UHWDLO EDJV IURP 0DOD\VLD  Retail Carrier Bags from
Malaysia  )HG 5HJ  'HS·W RI &RP 0DU     ,Q LWV 0RWLRQ IRU
-XGJPHQW RQ WKH $JHQF\ 5HFRUG 3ODLQWLII DUJXHV WKDW &RPPHUFH·V )LQDO 5HVXOWV
PXVWEHUHPDQGHGEHFDXVHVXEVWDQWLDOHYLGHQFHGRHVQRWVXSSRUWLWVILQGLQJVSee
generally3O·V%U(&)1R(XUR60(DOOHJHVWKDWWKHDJHQF\XQODZIXOO\UHOLHG
RQIDFWVDYDLODEOHWRDGMXVWWKHDFWXDOZHLJKWTXDQWLWLHVLQ(XUR60(·VGDWDId.DW
²,WIXUWKHUFRQWHVWV&RPPHUFH·VUHOLDQFHRQDQDGYHUVHLQIHUHQFHWRGHWHUPLQH
FHUWDLQ LQODQG IUHLJKW H[SHQVH GDWD IRU 86 VDOHV WKDW WKH DJHQF\ GHHPHG
XQYHULILDEOHId.DW²)LQDOO\(XUR60(FRQWHQGVWKDWWKHDJHQF\VKRXOGKDYH
FRUUHFWHGDPLQLVWHULDOHUURUWKDW3ODLQWLIIEURXJKWWRLWVDWWHQWLRQEXWWKDW&RPPHUFH
UHMHFWHGDVXQWLPHO\Id.DW²)RUWKHUHDVRQVVHWIRUWKEHORZ3ODLQWLII·V0RWLRQ
IRU-XGJPHQWRQWKH$JHQF\5HFRUGLVDENIEDDQG&RPPHUFH·V)LQDO5HVXOWVDUH
SUSTAINED
BACKGROUND
,Q $XJXVW  &RPPHUFH SXEOLVKHG DQ DQWLGXPSLQJ GXW\ RUGHU RQ UHWDLO
FDUULHU EDJV LPSRUWHG IURP 0DOD\VLD Retail Carrier Bags from Malaysia  )HG
5HJ  'HSW RI &RP $XJ    2UGHU   7KH 2UGHU SULPDULO\ FRYHUV WKH
XELTXLWRXVSODVWLFJURFHU\EDJVWKDWKHOSVKHSKHUGRXUSXUFKDVHVKRPH&RPPHUFH
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
SXEOLVKHGLWVDQQXDOQRWLFHRIRSSRUWXQLW\WRUHTXHVWDQDGPLQLVWUDWLYHUHYLHZRIWKH
2UGHULQ$XJXVW1RWLFHRI2SSRUWXQLW\-$DW²(&)1Rsee also
86&† D  ,QUHVSRQVH'HIHQGDQW,QWHUYHQRUWKH3RO\HWK\OHQH5HWDLO
&DUULHU%DJ&RPPLWWHH WKH&RPPLWWHH UHTXHVWHGDQDGPLQLVWUDWLYHUHYLHZRI(XUR
60(DOOHJLQJWKDWWKHFRPSDQ\´PD\KDYHSURGXFHGRUH[SRUWHGVXEMHFWPHUFKDQGLVH
WKDW ZDV VROG LQWR WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV DW OHVV WKDQ IDLU YDOXH GXULQJ WKH SHULRG RI
UHYLHZµ5HTIRU$GPLQ5HYLHZ-$DW²(&)1R&RPPHUFHFRQILUPHG
WKDW LW ZRXOG FRQGXFW DQ DGPLQLVWUDWLYH UHYLHZ RI (XUR 60(·V DFWLYLWLHV EHWZHHQ
$XJXVW   DQG -XO\    Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Admin. Reviews)HG5HJ² 'HS·WRI&RP2FW 
2Q 2FWREHU   &RPPHUFH VHQW D OHWWHU WR (XUR 60( LQIRUPLQJ WKH
FRPSDQ\ WKDW LW ZDV LQLWLDWLQJ DQ LQYHVWLJDWLRQ LQWR ZKHWKHU LW KDG LPSRUWHG RU
SURGXFHGPHUFKDQGLVHWKDWZDVWKHQVROGLQWKH8QLWHG6WDWHVIRUOHVVWKDQIDLUYDOXH
1RWLFHRI,QYHVWLJDWLRQDW²-$DW²(&)1R&RPPHUFHH[SODLQHG
WKDWDIDLOXUHWRUHVSRQGWRWKHUHTXHVWIRULQIRUPDWLRQ´PD\UHVXOWLQWKHDSSOLFDWLRQ
RISDUWLDORUWRWDOIDFWVDYDLODEOHSXUVXDQWWRVHFWLRQ D RIWKH$FWZKLFKPD\
LQFOXGHDGYHUVHLQIHUHQFHVSXUVXDQWWRVHFWLRQ E RIWKH$FWµId.DW²-$DW
²$WWDFKHGWRWKHOHWWHUZDVDTXHVWLRQQDLUHFRPSULVHGRIILYHSDUWVZKLFK
&RPPHUFH UHTXHVWHG (XUR 60( FRPSOHWH DV SDUW RI WKH UHYLHZ  ,QLWLDO
4XHVWLRQQDLUH-$ DW²(&)1R7KHTXHVWLRQVUHIOHFWHGWKHW\SHRI
LQIRUPDWLRQWKHDJHQF\ZRXOGQHHGLQRUGHUWRFRQGXFWDFRPSDULVRQRI(XUR60(·V
VDOHVLQLWVKRPHPDUNHWRI0DOD\VLDDQGWKH8QLWHG6WDWHV
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
7KH PHWKRG WKDW &RPPHUFH XVHG WR UXQ WKDW DQDO\VLV ZDV WKH ´DYHUDJHWR
DYHUDJHPHWKRGµ3UHOLP'HWHUPLQDWLRQ0HPRDW-$DW(&)1Rsee
also  &)5 †  E    7KH DYHUDJHWRDYHUDJH PHWKRG LV RQH RI WKH WKUHH
DSSURYHGPHWKRGRORJLHVIRU&RPPHUFHWRFRPSDUHVXEMHFWFRPSDQLHV·VDOHVLQWKHLU
KRPHPDUNHWDQGLQWKH8QLWHG6WDWHV&)5† E 7KHSXUSRVHRIWKH
FRPSDULVRQ LV WR GHWHUPLQH ZKHWKHU WKH VXEMHFW PHUFKDQGLVH LV EHLQJ VROG LQ WKH
8QLWHG6WDWHVIRUOHVVWKDQIDLUYDOXH2IWKHWKUHHDSSURYHGPHWKRGVWKHDJHQF\
HPSOR\V WKH DYHUDJHWRDYHUDJH DSSURDFK ´XQOHVV >&RPPHUFH@ GHWHUPLQHV DQRWKHU
PHWKRG LV DSSURSULDWH LQ D SDUWLFXODU FDVHµ   &)5 †  F   see also
Dillinger France S.A. v. United States)GQ )HG&LU 7KH
DYHUDJHWRDYHUDJHPHWKRGLVFRQGXFWHGE\´FRPSDU>LQJ@WKHZHLJKWHGDYHUDJHRIWKH
UHVSRQGHQW·VVDOHVSULFHVLQLWVKRPHFRXQWU\GXULQJWKHLQYHVWLJDWLRQSHULRGWRWKH
ZHLJKWHG DYHUDJH RI WKH UHVSRQGHQW·V VDOHV SULFHV LQ WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV GXULQJ WKH
VDPHSHULRGµStupp Corp. v. United States,)WK )HG&LU  see
also  &)5 †  G    7R SHUIRUP WKH FDOFXODWLRQ &RPPHUFH PXVW ILUVW
FROOHFWWKHFRPSDQ\·VFRVWDQGVDOHVGDWDIRUERWKWKHKRPHPDUNHWDQGWKH8QLWHG
6WDWHV
&RPPHUFH VHQW LWV LQLWLDO TXHVWLRQQDLUH RQ 2FWREHU    1RWLFH RI
,QYHVWLJDWLRQDW²-$DW²(&)1R6HFWLRQ%IRFXVHGRQWKHGDWD
UHODWHG WR (XUR 60(·V KRPH PDUNHW VDOHV 6HFWLRQ & SRVHG WKH VDPH TXHVWLRQV
FRQFHUQLQJWKHFRPSDQ\·VVDOHVLQWKH8QLWHG6WDWHVDQG6HFWLRQ'LQTXLUHGDERXW
WKHFRVWVDVVRFLDWHGZLWKWKHSURGXFWLRQRIWKHVXEMHFWPHUFKDQGLVHId.DW²
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
,QLWLDO4XHVWLRQQDLUH6HFWLRQ%&'-$DW(&)1R,QERWK
6HFWLRQV%DQG&&RPPHUFHLQVWUXFWHG(XUR60(WRUHSRUW´WKHVDOHTXDQWLW\IRU
>HDFK@ WUDQVDFWLRQµ DQG H[SODLQHG WKDW WKH HQWU\ VKRXOG EH ´WKH TXDQWLW\ RI WKH
VSHFLILFVKLSPHQWRULQYRLFHOLQHµRIHDFKFRUUHVSRQGLQJVDOHId.DW%&-$
DW )RUDOOWKHGDWD(XUR60(VXEPLWWHG&RPPHUFHDOVRUHTXLUHGWKH
FRPSDQ\ WR SURYLGH VXSSRUWLQJ GRFXPHQWDWLRQ  Id. DW * -$ DW   2Q WKH
LQVWUXFWLRQVVKHHW&RPPHUFHVWDWHGWKDWWKHFRPSDQ\ZDVWR´LGHQWLI\DOOXQLWVRI
PHDVXUHPHQWµXVHGLQLWV´QDUUDWLYHUHVSRQVHZRUNVKHHWVRURWKHUDSSHQGLFHVµDQG
WKDWLWPXVW´FRPSOHWH$SSHQGL[9,,ZKLFKLVDWHPSODWHSURYLGLQJDVWDQGDUGIRUPDW
IRUUHSRUWLQJWKHXQLWVRIPHDVXUHPHQWFXUUHQFLHVDQGFRQYHUVLRQIDFWRUVµId. 7KH
LQVWUXFWLRQVDOVRQRWHGWKDW´DOOLQIRUPDWLRQVXEPLWWHGPD\EHVXEMHFWWRYHULILFDWLRQµ
DQG WKDW D ´IDLOXUH WR DOORZ IXOO DQG FRPSOHWH YHULILFDWLRQ RI DQ\ LQIRUPDWLRQ PD\
DIIHFWWKHFRQVLGHUDWLRQDFFRUGHGWRWKDWRUDQ\RWKHUYHULILHGRUQRQYHULILHGLWHPLQ
WKHUHVSRQVHVµId.DW*-$DW 
(XUR 60( SURYLGHG WLPHO\ UHVSRQVHV WR WKH TXHVWLRQQDLUH VXEPLWWLQJ LWV
UHVSRQVHWR6HFWLRQ$RQ1RYHPEHUDQGWR6HFWLRQV%&DQG'RQ'HFHPEHU
(XUR60(6HFW$5HVS-$DW(&)1R(XUR60(6HFV%&'
5HVSV -$ DW  (&) 1R   ,Q LWV QDUUDWLYH UHVSRQVH H[SODLQLQJ WKH
TXDQWLWLHVDQGXQLWVRIPHDVXUHPHQWIRULWVVDOHVGDWD(XUR60(VWDWHGWKDWLWZDV
UHSRUWLQJERWKVWDQGDUGDQGDFWXDOZHLJKWVLQNLORJUDPVDQGWKDWWKH\LQFOXGHG´ERWK
IRU UHFRQFLOLDWLRQ SXUSRVHV>@µ  6HFV %&' 5HVS DW  -$ DW  (&) 1R 
(XUR60(DGGHGWKDWLW´DOVRUHSRUWHGTXDQWLW\LQFDUWRQV«DQGTXDQWLW\LQ
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
EDJV>@µId.7KHFRPSDQ\SURYLGHGWKHVDPHQDUUDWLYHH[SODQDWLRQLQ6HFWLRQ&ZKHQ
DVNHGDERXWWKHTXDQWLWLHVRILWVVDOHVLQWKH8QLWHG6WDWHVId.DW-$DW
$WRUDODUJXPHQWFRXQVHOIRU(XUR60(H[SODLQHGWKHGLIIHUHQFHEHWZHHQWKHILJXUHV
´6WDQGDUG ZHLJKWµ UHIHUV WR DQ DSSUR[LPDWHG ZHLJKW RI WKH EDJV ´EDVHG RQ WKH
WKLFNQHVVWKHOHQJWKWKHZLGWKWKHGHSWKRIWKHEDJµDQGRWKHUPHWULFVZKLOH´DFWXDO
ZHLJKWµUHIHUVWRH[DFWO\WKDW³WKHZHLJKWRIWKHEDJVZKHQWKRVHEDJVDUHZHLJKHG
2UDO$UJ7UDW²²(&)1R+RZHYHU(XUR60(H[SODLQHGWKDW
WKH´DFWXDOZHLJKWVµLWVXEPLWWHGZHUHQRWEDVHGRQDOLWHUDOZHLJKLQJRIHDFKFDUWRQ
DVWKHGHILQLWLRQRIWKHWHUPZRXOGVXJJHVW,QVWHDGWKHFRPSDQ\ZHLJKHGDVLQJOH
FDUWRQIURPHDFKVKLSPHQWDQGWKHQPXOWLSOLHGWKHZHLJKWRIWKDWRQHFDUWRQE\WKH
WRWDOQXPEHURIFDUWRQVLQWKHVDOHWRDUULYHDWWKH´DFWXDOZHLJKWµId.DW
7KHGDWD3ODLQWLIISURIIHUHGDV´DFWXDOZHLJKWµZDVWKHUHIRUHDQDYHUDJHEDVHGRQD
UDQGRPVDPSOLQJUDWKHUWKDQWKHDFWXDOZHLJKWRIWKHSURGXFWIRUHDFKVDOH
:KHQVXSSO\LQJLWVVWDQGDUGZHLJKWDQG´DFWXDOZHLJKWµGDWD(XUR60(GLG
QRW PDNH DQ\ REMHFWLRQ WR &RPPHUFH·V UHTXHVW IRU ´WKH TXDQWLW\ RI WKH VSHFLILF
VKLSPHQW>@µQRUGLGLWH[SUHVVDQ\FRQFHUQDERXWLWVDELOLW\WRSURYLGHWKHUHTXHVWHG
GDWD6HF%&'5HVSDW-$DW(&)1Rsee also,VVXHV
DQG'HFLVLRQ0HPR ,'0 DW-$DW(&)1R ´$W&RPPHUFH·VUHTXHVW
(XUR60(UHSRUWHGWKHDFWXDOZHLJKWIRUHDFKWUDQVDFWLRQHYHQWKRXJKLWGRHVQRW
UHFRUG WKDW LQIRUPDWLRQ GXULQJ WKH RUGLQDU\ FRXUVH RI EXVLQHVV  7KHUH ZDV QR
LQGLFDWLRQ LQ WKH UHFRUG SULRU WR YHULILFDWLRQ WKDW WKHUH PD\ EH DQ LVVXH ZLWK (XUR
60(·V UHSRUWLQJ>@µ   $W WKH HQG RI WKH QDUUDWLYH SRUWLRQ RI 6HFWLRQ %&' RI WKH
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
TXHVWLRQQDLUH (XUR 60( SURYLGHG &RPPHUFH ZLWK D VHULHV RI DWWDFKPHQWV DQG
VXSSRUWLQJ GRFXPHQWDWLRQ  ([KLELW  FRQWDLQHG (XUR 60(·V +RPH 0DUNHW 6DOHV
/LVWLQJDQG([KLELWFRQWDLQHGLWV866DOHV/LVWLQJ,QERWKH[KLELWVLWSURYLGHG
IRXU PHDVXUHPHQWV IRU WKH TXDQWLW\ RI VDOHV LQ WKH UHVSHFWLYH PDUNHWV  VWDQGDUG
ZHLJKWDFWXDOZHLJKWQXPEHURIFDUWRQVDQGSHUEDJV6HF%&'5HVSDW([
 ([  -$ DW ² ² (&) 1R   2Q 6HSWHPEHU  
&RPPHUFHSXEOLVKHGLWV3UHOLPLQDU\5HVXOWVDQG3UHOLPLQDU\'HFLVLRQ0HPR 3'0 
Retail Carrier Bags from Malaysia)HG5HJ 'HS·WRI&RP6HSW 
3UHOLPLQDU\ 5HVXOWV  3UHOLPLQDU\ ,VVXHV DQG 'HFLVLRQ 0HPR 'HS·W RI &RP $XJ
 -$²(&)1R,WFDOFXODWHGDGXPSLQJPDUJLQRIDQG
FRQFOXGHGWKDW´VDOHVRISRO\HWK\OHQHUHWDLOFDUULHUEDJV«ZHUHQRWPDGHDWOHVVWKDQ
QRUPDO YDOXH GXULQJ WKH SHULRG RI UHYLHZ>@µ  3UHOLPLQDU\ 5HVXOWV  )HG 5HJ DW

,Q OLHX RI SHUIRUPLQJ DQ RQVLWH YHULILFDWLRQ &RPPHUFH VHQW (XUR 60( D
YHULILFDWLRQTXHVWLRQQDLUH ,/29 RQ2FWREHUUHTXHVWLQJGRFXPHQWDWLRQWR
VXSSRUWWKHLQIRUPDWLRQWKHFRPSDQ\KDGUHSRUWHGHDUOLHULQFOXGLQJWKHTXDQWLWLHV
RILWVPHUFKDQGLVHVROGDQGLWVIUHLJKWFRVWV,/295HTXHVWIRU,QIRUPDWLRQ-$DW
²(&)1R7RYHULI\WKHVDOHVGDWD&RPPHUFHUDQGRPO\VHOHFWHGVL[
WUDQVDFWLRQV ³ WKUHH IURP WKH 8QLWHV 6WDWHV DQG WKUHH IURP 0DOD\VLD ³ DQG
UHTXHVWHG(XUR60(SURYLGHVXSSRUWLQJGRFXPHQWVDQGDQDUUDWLYHH[SODQDWLRQIRU
HDFK WUDQVDFWLRQ WR YHULI\ WKH GDWD WKDW LW KDG DOUHDG\ VXEPLWWHG UHODWHG WR WKRVH
VDOHVId.DW²7RYHULI\WKHIUHLJKWFRVWV&RPPHUFHUHTXHVWHGVXSSRUWLQJ
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
GRFXPHQWDWLRQ WR H[SODLQ KRZ WKH FRPSDQ\ UHFRUGHG LWV IUHLJKW H[SHQVHV LQ WZR
GLIIHUHQWVHOHFWHG86VDOHVDQGWZRGLIIHUHQW0DOD\VLDQVDOHVId.DW(XUR
60(VXEPLWWHGLWVUHVSRQVHRQ2FWREHU,/295HVS-$DW²
(&)1R,WVWDWHGWKDWWKHDWWDFKHGLQYRLFHVFRQWDLQHGWKHTXDQWLW\LQIRUPDWLRQ
LQWHUPVRIWKHQXPEHURIFDUWRQVDQGSHURQHWKRXVDQGEDJV$QRWKHUDWWDFKPHQW
ODEHOHG ´ORDGLQJ DGYLFHµ SURYLGHG ´VXSSRUW IRU TXDQWLW\ LQ NLORJUDPV DFWXDO
ZHLJKW >@µId.DW-$DW7KHFRPSDQ\VLPLODUO\H[SODLQHGWKDWDQRWKHU
´ORDGLQJ DGYLFHµ GRFXPHQW FRQWDLQHG TXDQWLW\ LQIRUPDWLRQ DERXW WKH UHOHYDQW
PHUFKDQGLVH´ZLWKDFWXDOZHLJKWµLQUHVSRQVHWRTXHVWLRQVDERXWLWVIUHLJKWH[SHQVHV
Id.DW-$DW7KHDWWDFKPHQWVLQFOXGHGKDQGZULWWHQFDOFXODWLRQVId.DW
([-$DW(&)1R
$OWKRXJK WKH GRFXPHQWV WKHPVHOYHV GLG QRW H[SODLQ KRZ WKH ZHLJKWV RI HDFK VDOH
EURNHGRZQZLWKLQWKHVKLSPHQWWKHKDQGZULWWHQFDOFXODWLRQVDWWHPSWHGWRGRVR
Id.2QFHDJDLQ(XUR60(GLGQRWH[SUHVVDFRQFHUQDERXWLWVDELOLW\WRSURYLGHWKH
UHTXHVWHGLQIRUPDWLRQSee generally,/295HVS-$DW²(&)1R
3ODLQWLII·VFRXQVHOH[SODLQHGDWRUDODUJXPHQWWKDWWKRVHORDGLQJGRFXPHQWVZHUH
ZKHUHWKHHPSOR\HHLQFKDUJHRIFDOFXODWLQJWKHDFWXDOZHLJKWUHFRUGHGWKHZHLJKWRI
HDFK VKLSPHQW  6KH FODULILHG WKDW WKH KDQGZULWWHQ QRWDWLRQV ZHUH WKH HPSOR\HH·V
FDOFXODWLRQV ´H[WUDSRODWLQJµ IURP WKH ZHLJKW RI D VLQJOH ER[ LQ WKH VKLSPHQW WKH
ZHLJKWRIWKHHQWLUHVDOHE\PXOWLSO\LQJWKHZHLJKWRIWKHER[E\WKHWRWDOQXPEHURI
ER[HV2UDO$UJ7UDW²(&)1R
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
)RUILYHRIWKHVL[GRFXPHQWVWKHZHLJKWRIWKHRYHUDOOVKLSPHQWOLVWHGRQWKH
GRFXPHQW GLIIHUHG IURP ZKDW (XUR 60( KDG RULJLQDOO\ WROG &RPPHUFH LQ LWV
TXHVWLRQQDLUHUHVSRQVHSee ,'0DW-$DW(&)1R,/295HVSDW([
-$DW(&)1R,Q
WKRVHILYHFDVHVWKHKDQGZULWWHQQRWHVDWWULEXWHGWKHHQWLUHW\RIWKHGLVFUHSDQF\WR
WKHVDOHVLQWKHVKLSPHQWWKDW&RPPHUFHZDVnotVSRWFKHFNLQJSee ,'0DW²
-$DW²(&)1R,/295HVSDW([-$DW
    (&) 1R   )RU WKH VDOHV &RPPHUFH ZDV VSRW
FKHFNLQJ WKH KDQGZULWWHQ QXPEHUV PDWFKHG ZKDW (XUR 60( RULJLQDOO\ WROG
&RPPHUFH GRZQ WR WKH KXQGUHGWK RI D NLORJUDP EXW WKH VDOHV &RPPHUFH ZDV QRW
VSRWFKHFNLQJZHUHRIIE\WHQVRUKXQGUHGVRINLORJUDPVSee ,'0DW-$DW
(&)1R,/295HVSDW([-$DW
(&)1R3HW·U·V&DVH%UDW$WW-$DW²(&)1R
FKDUWFRPSDULQJUHSRUWHGILJXUHVWRYHULILFDWLRQH[KLELWV 
7KH VWRU\ ZDV VLPLODU ZKHQ &RPPHUFH WULHG WR YHULI\ (XUR 60(·V LQODQG
IUHLJKWH[SHQVHV&RPPHUFHFKRVHWRVSRWFKHFNWKHVDPHVL[VDOHVLWXVHGWRYHULI\
DFWXDOZHLJKWSOXVDQDGGLWLRQDOWZRKRPHPDUNHWVDOHV,'0DW-$DW
(&) 1R   $OO ILYH KRPH PDUNHW VDOHV GLIIHUHG EHWZHHQ WKH YHULILFDWLRQ
GRFXPHQWDWLRQDQGZKDW(XUR60(RULJLQDOO\UHSRUWHGWR&RPPHUFHId. DW²
-$ DW ² 3HW·U·V &DVH %U DW $WW  -$ DW ² (&) 1R  FKDUW
FRPSDULQJ UHSRUWHG ILJXUHV WR YHULILFDWLRQ H[KLELWV   $JDLQ WKH YHULILFDWLRQ
GRFXPHQWVDWWULEXWHGDOOGLVFUHSDQFLHVWRVDOHV&RPPHUFHZDVQRWVSRWFKHFNLQJDQG
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
UHSRUWHGDSHUIHFWPDWFKIRUWKHWUDQVDFWLRQV&RPPHUFHZDVVSRWFKHFNLQJ,'0 DW
² -$ DW ² 3HW·U·V &DVH %U DW $WW  -$ DW ² (&) 1R 
FKDUWFRPSDULQJUHSRUWHGILJXUHVWRYHULILFDWLRQH[KLELWV +RZHYHUIRUIRXURIWKH
ILYH VDOHV WKH GLVFUHSDQFLHV ZHUH QHJOLJLEOH DQG SRVVLEO\ DWWULEXWDEOH WR URXQGLQJ
GHFLVLRQV,'0DW²-$DW²
(XUR 60( GHFOLQHG WR VXEPLW D FDVH EULHI LQ UHVSRQVH WR WKH 3UHOLPLQDU\
5HVXOWV  'HI·V %U DW  Q (&) 1R   +RZHYHU RQ 'HFHPEHU   WKH
&RPPLWWHH VHQW &RPPHUFH D FDVH EULHI DUJXLQJ WKDW   ´&RPPHUFH VKRXOG DSSO\
SDUWLDO DGYHUVH IDFWV DYDLODEOH ¶$)$·  DV D UHVXOW RI (XUR 60(·V LQDELOLW\ WR
VXEVWDQWLDWH UHSRUWHG VDOHV TXDQWLWLHV DQG LQODQG IUHLJKW H[SHQVHVµ DQG  
´&RPPHUFHVKRXOGDOVRFRUUHFWDPLQLVWHULDOHUURULQWKHSUHOLPLQDU\PDUJLQSURJUDP
E\ZKLFKIUHLJKWUHYHQXHZDVGRXEOHFRXQWHGµ3HW·U·V&DVH%U-$DW²
(&)1R
(XUR 60( WKHQ VXEPLWWHG D UHEXWWDO EULHI DUJXLQJ WKDW &RPPHUFH KDG
FRPPLWWHGDPLQLVWHULDOHUURULQLWVIUHLJKWUHYHQXHFDSFDOFXODWLRQ-$DW
(&) 1R   %HFDXVH WKDW LVVXH KDG QRW EHHQ UDLVHG LQ WKH &RPPLWWHH·V EULHI
&RPPHUFH´UHMHFWHGWKDWVHJPHQWRI(XUR60(·VUHEXWWDOEULHIRQWKHJURXQGWKDW
WKHFKDOOHQJHZDVDVWDQGDORQHDUJXPHQWDQGQRWUHEXWWLQJDQ\WKLQJSHWLWLRQHUVKDG
VDLGµ  'HI·V 5HVS %U DW  Q (&) 1R   2Q -DQXDU\   (XUR 60(
VXEPLWWHG D UHYLVHG UHEXWWDO EULHI IRFXVLQJ LQVWHDG RQ LWV FODLP WKDW WKH FRPSDQ\
´KD>G@VXEPLWWHGDPSOHDQGDFFXUDWHLQIRUPDWLRQµDQGWKDW´WKHGLVFUHSDQFLHVQRWHG
E\WKH3HWLWLRQHUVZLWKUHJDUGWRDFWXDOZHLJKWZKLFKDOVRDIIHFW>@0DOD\VLDQLQODQG
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
IUHLJKWDUHVPDOODQGLPPDWHULDOµ3O·V5HEXWWDO&DVH%UDW-$DW(&)
1R(XUR60(DUJXHGWKDWDQ\UHYLVLRQVWRWKH3UHOLPLQDU\5HVXOWVZRXOGEH
´HLWKHUXQQHFHVVDU\RUVKRXOGEHOLPLWHGLQVFRSHµId. ,WDOVRDVVHUWHGWKDWLQWKH
DEVHQFH RI WKH YHULILDEOH DFWXDO ZHLJKW GDWD WKDW WKH DJHQF\ UHTXHVWHG &RPPHUFH
FRXOGKDYHSHUIRUPHGLWVFDOFXODWLRQZLWKWKHVWDQGDUGZHLJKWRUQXPEHURIEDJVGDWD
WKDWWKHFRPSDQ\GLGSURYLGHId.DW²-$DW²
$IWHU FRQVLGHUDWLRQ RI ERWK SDUWLHV· EULHIV &RPPHUFH SXEOLVKHG LWV )LQDO
5HVXOWVDQGLWVDFFRPSDQ\LQJ,VVXHVDQG'HFLVLRQ0HPRSee ,'0-$DW²
(&)1RRetail Carrier Bags from Malaysia: Final Results of the Admin.
Dumping Review; 2019-2020  )HG 5HJ ² 'HS·W RI &RP 6HSW 
 , -$ DW ² (&) 1R  )LQDO 5HVXOWV   7KH )LQDO 5HVXOWV GLIIHUHG
VLJQLILFDQWO\IURPWKH3UHOLPLQDU\5HVXOWVPRVWQRWDEO\LQWKHFRQFOXVLRQWKDW´(XUR
60(6GQ%KGPDGHVDOHVRIVXEMHFWPHUFKDQGLVHDWOHVVWKDQQRUPDOYDOXH 19 
GXULQJWKHSHULRGRIUHYLHZ 325 µ)LQDO5HVXOWVDW-$DW(&)1R
&RPPHUFHFRQFOXGHGWKDWWKHUHZDVDZHLJKWHGGXPSLQJPDUJLQId.,Q
WKH DFFRPSDQ\LQJ ,VVXHV DQG 'HFLVLRQ 0HPR &RPPHUFH H[SODLQHG WKH WKUHH
DGMXVWPHQWVWKDWLWPDGHSee generally ,'0-$DW²(&)1R
7KH ILUVW DGMXVWPHQW FRQFHUQHG WKH FDOFXODWLRQ RI (XUR 60(·V VDOHV ZHLJKW
GDWDDQGWKHGLVFUHSDQF\WKDW&RPPHUFHREVHUYHGZKHQLWDWWHPSWHGWRYHULI\WKH
GDWD  )RU WKRVH ILJXUHV &RPPHUFH GHFLGHG WKDW ´LW LV DSSURSULDWH WR XVH IDFWV
RWKHUZLVHDYDLODEOHLQUHODWLRQWR(XUR60(·VUHSRUWLQJRIDFWXDOZHLJKWDQGIRUJURVV
XQLWSULFHDQGVDOHVH[SHQVHVZKLFKDUHUHSRUWHGRQDSHUNLORJUDPDFWXDOZHLJKW
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
EDVLV DFURVV ERWK WKH KRPH PDUNHW DQG 86VDOHVGDWDEDVHV>@µ ,'0 DW  -$ DW
(&)1R7KLVZDVEHFDXVH´WKHUHZHUHGLVFUHSDQFLHVEHWZHHQWKHUHSRUWHG
DFWXDOZHLJKWVDQGWKH¶ORDGLQJDGYLFH·GRFXPHQWIRUILYHRIWKHVL[VDOHVWUDFHV(XUR
60(GLGQRWH[SODLQKRZLWDOORFDWHGWKHWRWDOZHLJKWDFURVVWKHWUDQVDFWLRQVFRYHUHG
E\ WKH ¶ORDGLQJ DGYLFH· GRFXPHQWVµ  Id.  &RPPHUFH GHFOLQHG WR GUDZ DQ\ DGYHUVH
LQIHUHQFHKHUH'HVSLWHWKHGLVFUHSDQFLHV&RPPHUFHGLGQRWIHHO´WKDW(XUR60(
>KDG@ IDLOHG WR FRRSHUDWH E\ QRW DFWLQJ WR WKH EHVW RI LWV DELOLW\ WR FRPSO\ ZLWK
&RPPHUFH·VUHTXHVWIRULQIRUPDWLRQµId.
7KH VHFRQG DGMXVWPHQW SHUWDLQHG WR IUHLJKW FRVWV  ,'0 DW  -$ DW 
7KRVHILJXUHVIHOOLQWRWZRFDWHJRULHV  LQODQGIUHLJKWH[SHQVHVLQWKHKRPHPDUNHW
RI0DOD\VLD ,1/)7&+ LQFXUUHGZKHQPHUFKDQGLVHPRYHGIURPWKHPDQXIDFWXUHU
WR WKH GLVWULEXWLRQ ZDUHKRXVH DQG   86 LQODQG IUHLJKW H[SHQVHV ',1/)738 
LQFXUUHGEHWZHHQWKHPDQXIDFWXULQJSODQWDQGWKHSRUWRIH[SRUWDWLRQId. )RUHDFK
FDWHJRU\&RPPHUFHUHTXHVWHGGRFXPHQWDWLRQWRYHULI\WKHILJXUHVWKDW(XUR60(
LQLWLDOO\ VXEPLWWHG  ,/29 4XHVWLRQQDLUH -$ DW ² (&) 1R   7KH
GRFXPHQWVLWSURYLGHGIDLOHGWRH[SODLQKRZWKHFRPSDQ\DOORFDWHGWKHFRVWVEHWZHHQ
WKRVHVDOHVDQGZK\FHUWDLQGHGXFWLRQVDSSHDUHGRQWKHFRPSDQ\·VVXPPDU\SDJHV
,'0DW²-$DW²(&)1R&RPPHUFHDOVRDVNHGIRUVXSSRUWLQJ
GRFXPHQWDWLRQRQWZRDGGLWLRQDO0DOD\VLDQVDOHVDQG(XUR60(·VUHVSRQVHWRWKDW
UHTXHVW FRQWDLQHG WKH VDPH VKRUWFRPLQJV  ,Q ERWK FDVHV (XUR 60( SURYLGHG
KDQGZULWWHQQRWDWLRQVRQWKHVXSSRUWLQJGRFXPHQWVWKDWDWWHPSWHGWRDWWULEXWHDOO
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
GLVFUHSDQFLHVLQWKHGDWDWRVDOHVWKDWWKHDJHQF\KDGQRWVHOHFWHGIRUYHULILFDWLRQ
Id.DW-$DW
'HVSLWHWKRVHGLVFUHSDQFLHV&RPPHUFHRQFHDJDLQGHFOLQHGWRDSSO\DGYHUVH
LQIHUHQFHVDJDLQVW(XUR60(ZKHQILOOLQJWKHJDSVUHODWHGWRKRPHPDUNHWLQODQG
IUHLJKWH[SHQVHVDVVRFLDWHGZLWKWKHWKUHHWUDQVDFWLRQVLWVHOHFWHGIRUVSRWFKHFNLQJ
,W H[SODLQHG ´>L@Q WKH WKUHH KRPH PDUNHW VDOHV WUDFHV WKH YDULDQFH EHWZHHQ ZKDW
ZDVUHSRUWHGLQWKHGDWDEDVHDQGWKHVXSSRUWLQJGRFXPHQWDWLRQLVYHU\VPDOODQG
ZHILQGWKDWWKHYDULDQFHFRXOGSODXVLEO\EHWKHUHVXOWRIURXQGLQJµId.DW-$DW
&RPPHUFHDOVRIRXQG´QREDVLVWRDSSO\IDFWVDYDLODEOHWR>WKHLQODQGIUHLJKW
H[SHQVHV@WKURXJKRXWWKHKRPHPDUNHWGDWDEDVHEHFDXVHWKHYDULDQFHVEHWZHHQWKH
VXSSRUWLQJ GRFXPHQWDWLRQ DQG ZKDW ZDV UHSRUWHG LQ WKH GDWDEDVH DSSHDU ODUJHO\
LPPDWHULDOµ  Id. DW  -$ DW   +RZHYHU ZLWK UHJDUG WR RQH RI WKH WZR
DGGLWLRQDO KRPH PDUNHW WUDQVDFWLRQV WKH DJHQF\ GLG ´ILQG LW DSSURSULDWH WR DSSO\
IDFWVDYDLODEOHWRWKHWUDQVDFWLRQV«JLYHQWKDWWKHVL]HRIWKDWYDULDQFHFDQQRWEH
H[SODLQHGE\URXQGLQJDQGWKHUHLVQRH[SODQDWLRQUHJDUGLQJWKDWYDULDQFHRQWKH
UHFRUGµId.7KRXJK&RPPHUFHRSWHGWRDSSO\IDFWVDYDLODEOHWRWKDWVLQJOHVDOHLW
RQFHDJDLQGLG´QRWILQGWKDW(XUR60(IDLOHGWRFRRSHUDWHWRWKHEHVWRILWVDELOLW\µ
DQG WKHUHIRUH GLG ´QRW ILQG WKDW WKH DSSOLFDWLRQ RI DQ DGYHUVH LQIHUHQFH >ZDV@
ZDUUDQWHG>@µId.
)RU LQODQG IUHLJKW FRVWV IRU 86 VDOHV KRZHYHU &RPPHUFH DJUHHG ZLWK WKH
&RPPLWWHH·V SRVLWLRQ DQG DSSOLHG DQ DGYHUVH LQIHUHQFH  7KH DJHQF\ MXVWLILHG WKLV
EHFDXVH´(XUR60(IDLOHGWRFRRSHUDWHWRWKHEHVWRILWVDELOLWLHVµE\  FRQWLQXLQJ
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
´WRUHSRUWGRPHVWLFLQODQGIUHLJKWH[SHQVHVWKDWGLGQRWFRUUHVSRQGWRWKHXQGHUO\LQJ
GRFXPHQWDWLRQRQWKHUHFRUGHYHQDIWHU&RPPHUFHQRWLILHG(XUR60(WKDWWKHUHZHUH
GLVFUHSDQFLHV LQ LWV UHSRUWLQJµ DQG   QRWSURSHUO\ H[SODLQLQJ KRZ LW DOORFDWHG WKH
FKDUJHV RQ LWV IUHLJKW LQYRLFHV DPRQJ WKH VHOHFWHG WUDQVDFWLRQV  Id. DW  -$ DW
&RPPHUFHWKHUHIRUH´LQFUHDVHGDOOUHSRUWHGGRPHVWLFLQODQGIUHLJKWH[SHQVHV
« E\ WKH ODUJHVW SHUFHQW YDULDQFH FDOFXODWHG RQ DQ H[KLELWZLGH EDVLV DPRQJ WKH
WKUHH86VDOHVWUDFHVµId. 
7KHWKLUGDGMXVWPHQWWKDW&RPPHUFHPDGHEHWZHHQWKH3UHOLPLQDU\DQG)LQDO
5HVXOWVZDVWKHFRUUHFWLRQRIDPLQLVWHULDOHUURUKLJKOLJKWHGE\WKH&RPPLWWHHLQLWV
FDVHEULHI3HW·U·V&DVH%UDW-$DW(&)1R&RPPHUFHDJUHHGWKDW
LQFDOFXODWLQJLWV3UHOLPLQDU\5HVXOWVLWKDG´GRXEOHFRXQWHGIUHLJKWUHYHQXHLQWKH
FDOFXODWLRQRIQHW86SULFH>@µ,'0DW-$DW(&)1R7KHDJHQF\
FRUUHFWHG LWV PLVWDNH UHSODFLQJ WKH JURVV XQLW SULFH YDULDEOH WKDW ZDV LQFOXVLYH RI
IUHLJKWUHYHQXHWRRQHWKDWH[FOXGHGIUHLJKWUHYHQXHId. 
$IWHU &RPPHUFH SXEOLVKHG WKH )LQDO 5HVXOWV (XUR 60( ILOHG LWV RZQ
PLQLVWHULDOHUURUDOOHJDWLRQ$OOHJDWLRQRI0LQLVWHULDO(UURUDW-$DW(&)
1R(XUR60(UHSHDWHGWKHFODLPLWRULJLQDOO\PDGHLQLWVUHEXWWDOEULHIDUJXLQJ
WKDW &RPPHUFH KDG PLVWDNHQO\ H[FOXGHG FHUWDLQ ORJLVWLF H[SHQVHV IURP LWV 86
IUHLJKWUHYHQXHH[SHQVHFDSId.DW-$DW,QLWVOHWWHUWR&RPPHUFH(XUR
60(DVVHUWHGWKDW´VHWWLQJWKHFDSDWMXVWLQWHUQDWLRQDOIUHLJKW«ZRXOGHUURQHRXVO\
RPLW>DODUJHSHUFHQWDJH@RIWKHIUHLJKWFRVWVDVVRFLDWHGZLWKPRYLQJWKHSURGXFWWR
WKH86FXVWRPHU>@µId.DW-$DW%HFDXVH&RPPHUFHKDG´SHUIRUPHGWKH
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
VDPHIUHLJKWUHYHQXHFDSFDOFXODWLRQµLQLWV3UHOLPLQDU\5HVXOWVDQG(XUR60(IDLOHG
WRUDLVHWKHLVVXHXQWLODIWHUSXEOLFDWLRQRIWKH)LQDO5HVXOWV&RPPHUFHUHMHFWHGWKH
DOOHJDWLRQDVXQWLPHO\&RPPHUFH5HVSWR0LQLVWHULDO(UURU$OOHJDWLRQDW²-$
DW ² (&) 1R   &LWLQJ  &)5 †  F   DQG  &)5 †
 F   LW H[SODLQHG WKDW WKH DOOHJHG HUURU ZDV ´GLVFRYHUDEOH HDUOLHU LQ WKH
SURFHHGLQJµDQGWKHUHIRUHVKRXOGKDYHEHHQUDLVHGLQ3ODLQWLII·VFDVHEULHIId.(XUR
60(·VGHFLVLRQWRQRWVXEPLWDFDVHEULHIIRUIHLWHGWKHLVVXHId.DW
7KH&RXUWKHOGRUDODUJXPHQWRQ0D\(&)1R3ODLQWLIIFODULILHG
WKDWLWGLGQRWFKDOOHQJH&RPPHUFH·VXVHRIDYHULILFDWLRQTXHVWLRQQDLUHLQOLHXRIDQ
RQVLWH YHULILFDWLRQ GHVSLWH H[WHQVLYH GLVFXVVLRQ RI WKDW GHFLVLRQ LQ LWV EULHIV  2UDO
$UJ7U(&)1R VWDWLQJWKDW´ZHGRQRWFRQWHVWWKHXVHRIWKH,/29«
TXHVWLRQQDLUHµ 7KH&RPPLWWHHFRQILUPHGWKDWLWKDGQRWILOHGDFURVVFRPSODLQWRU
LQDQ\RWKHUZD\FKDOOHQJHG&RPPHUFH·VGHFLVLRQWRUHVRUWWRIDFWVDYDLODEOHUDWKHU
WKDQGUDZDQDGYHUVHLQIHUHQFHId.DW3ODLQWLII·VFRXQVHODOVRFODULILHGWKDW
VKHZDVQRWFKDOOHQJLQJ&RPPHUFH·VLQODQGIUHLJKWFDOFXODWLRQVIRU(XUR60(·VKRPH
PDUNHWVDOHVId.DW ZKHQDVNHGWRFRQILUPWKDW(XUR60(ZDV´QRWREMHFWLQJ
WR ZKDW >&RPPHUFH@ GLGµ LQ FDOFXODWLQJ RQH RI WKH KRPH PDUNHW IUHLJKW H[SHQVHV
UHVSRQGLQJ ´ZH DUH QRWµ   )LQDOO\ WKH SDUWLHV JDYH WKHLU FRQVHQW IRU WKH &RXUW WR
FRQVLGHUSULRUDGPLQLVWUDWLYHUHYLHZVRI(XUR60(GHVSLWHWKRVHUHYLHZVQRWEHLQJ
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
IRUPDOO\ DGPLWWHG LQWR WKH UHFRUG  Id. DW  see also  86& †  ´7KH
FRQWHQWVRIWKH)HGHUDO5HJLVWHUVKDOOEHMXGLFLDOO\QRWLFHG>@µ  
2QWKHLVVXHRI(XUR60(·VTXDQWLW\GDWDKRZHYHUWKHSDUWLHVZHUHQRWDEOH
WRDJUHHRQ  ZKHWKHU(XUR60(·VVWDQGDUGZHLJKWVXEPLVVLRQVKDGEHHQYHULILHG
 ZKHWKHULWZRXOGKDYHEHHQSRVVLEOHIRU&RPPHUFHWRSHUIRUPLWVFDOFXODWLRQVZLWK
WKHVWDQGDUGZHLJKWVWKDW3ODLQWLIIVXEPLWWHGDQG  ZKHWKHUWKHUHZDVD´JDSµLQ
WKHUHFRUGIRU&RPPHUFHWRILOO2QWKRVHTXHVWLRQVWKH&RXUWRUGHUHGWKHSDUWLHVWR
VXEPLWVXSSOHPHQWDOEULHILQJ(&)1R
(XUR60(VXEPLWWHGLWVOHWWHUEULHIRQ-XQH3O·V6XSS%U(&)1R
  ,W ILUVW DVVHUWHG WKDW LWV VWDQGDUG ZHLJKWV KDG EHHQ YHULILHG EHFDXVH QHLWKHU
&RPPHUFHQRUWKH&RPPLWWHHFKDOOHQJHGWKHGDWD Id.DW1H[W(XUR60(DUJXHG
WKDW WKH YHULILHG VWDQGDUG ZHLJKWV FRXOG KDYH EHHQ XVHG LQ &RPPHUFH·V HQWLUH
FDOFXODWLRQEHFDXVHWKHDJHQF\DOUHDG\XVHGVWDQGDUGZHLJKWVLQLWVEHORZFRVWWHVW
GLVSURYLQJ&RPPHUFH·VFODLPWKDW´LWZDVLPSRVVLEOHRULPSUDFWLFDOWRXVHVWDQGDUG
ZHLJKWVLQLWVFDOFXODWLRQVµId.DW²(XUR60(FRQFOXGHGWKDWXQGHUWKH)HGHUDO
&LUFXLW·VRSLQLRQLQZhejiang DunAn Hetian Metal Co. v. United States&RPPHUFH
FRXOGQRWUHVRUWWRIDFWVDYDLODEOHEHFDXVHWKHUHZDVQR´JDSµWREHILOOHGIdDW
FLWLQJ )G )HG&LU  ´7KHXVHRIIDFWVRWKHUZLVHDYDLODEOH«
 7KH SDUWLHV DJUHHG WKDW WKH &RXUW FRXOG WDNH MXGLFLDO QRWLFH RI WKH H[LVWHQFH RI SULRU
DGPLQLVWUDWLYHLQYHVWLJDWLRQVWRZKLFK(XUR60(KDGEHHQVXEMHFWDVWKRVHGRFXPHQWVDUH
SXEOLFO\ DYDLODEOH  +RZHYHU WKH IXOO DGPLQLVWUDWLYH UHFRUGV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKH
LQYHVWLJDWLRQVZHUHQRWIRUPDOO\SODFHGRQWRWKHUHFRUGDQGDUHQRWFRQVLGHUHGLQWKLVPDWWHU
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
LV RQO\ DSSURSULDWH WR ILOO JDSV ZKHQ &RPPHUFH PXVW UHO\ RQ RWKHU VRXUFHV RI
LQIRUPDWLRQWRFRPSOHWHWKHIDFWXDOUHFRUGµ  LQWHUQDOFLWDWLRQVRPLWWHG 
7KH*RYHUQPHQWVXEPLWWHGLWVUHVSRQVHRQ-XQH'HI·V6XSS%U
(&)1R,WDUJXHGWKDWVWDQGDUGZHLJKWILJXUHVZHUHQRWSURYLGHGIRUDOOWKHGDWD
SRLQWVWKDWZHUHUHTXHVWHGDQGZHUHQHFHVVDU\WRFRPSOHWH&RPPHUFH·VFDOFXODWLRQ
&RPPHUFHFODLPHGWKDW(XUR60(UHSRUWHGLWVVDOHVH[SHQVHVLQERWKWKH0DOD\VLDQ
DQG 86 PDUNHWV RQO\ RQ DQ DFWXDO ZHLJKW EDVLV ³ ILJXUHV WKDW SURYHG WR EH
XQYHULILDEOHId.DW:LWK´QRRWKHUXVDEOHPHWULFVDYDLODEOHRQWKHUHFRUGµIRUWKRVH
GDWDSRLQWVWKH*RYHUQPHQWDUJXHGWKDW&RPPHUFHIDFHGD´JDSµDQGODZIXOO\UHOLHG
RQIDFWVDYDLODEOHId.DW,QLWVEULHIWKH&RPPLWWHHDGGHGWKDWD´FRQYHUVLRQµRI
DOO WKH ILJXUHV WR VWDQGDUG ZHLJKWV ³ DV 3ODLQWLII SURSRVHG ³ ZRXOG KDYH EHHQ
LPSRVVLEOHZLWKRXW´DQDFWXDOTXDQWLW\ILHOGµZKLFK&RPPHUFHKDGGHWHUPLQHG´DW
YHULILFDWLRQ WR EH XQUHOLDEOHµ  'HI,QW·V 6XSS %U DW  (&) 1R   :LWK WKHVH
FODULILFDWLRQVWKH&RXUWDSSOLHVWKHODZ
JURISDICTION AND STANDARD OF REVIEW
7KLV&RXUWKDVMXULVGLFWLRQRYHUWKH3ODLQWLII·VFKDOOHQJHRI&RPPHUFH·V)LQDO
5HVXOWV LQ LWV $GPLQLVWUDWLYH 5HYLHZ XQGHU  86& † D D  % LLL  DQG 
86&† F 7KH&RXUWPXVWVXVWDLQ&RPPHUFH·V´GHWHUPLQDWLRQVILQGLQJVRU
FRQFOXVLRQVµXQOHVVWKH\DUH´XQVXSSRUWHGE\VXEVWDQWLDOHYLGHQFHRQWKHUHFRUGRU
RWKHUZLVHQRWLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWKWKHODZµ86&†D E  % L :KHUHWKH\
IDLOWRPHHWWKDWVWDQGDUGWKH&RXUWPXVW´KROGXQODZIXODQ\GHWHUPLQDWLRQILQGLQJ
RUFRQFOXVLRQIRXQGµId.$VWKLV&RXUWKDVDUWLFXODWHG´WKHTXHVWLRQLVQRWZKHWKHU
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
WKH&RXUWZRXOGKDYHUHDFKHGWKHVDPHGHFLVLRQRQWKHVDPHUHFRUG>@UDWKHULWLV
ZKHWKHUWKHDGPLQLVWUDWLYHUHFRUGDVDZKROHSHUPLWV&RPPHUFH·VFRQFOXVLRQµSee
New American Keg v. United States 1R ²  :/  DW  &,7
0DU )XUWKHUPRUH´WKHSRVVLELOLW\RIGUDZLQJWZRLQFRQVLVWHQWFRQFOXVLRQV
IURP WKH HYLGHQFH GRHV QRW SUHYHQW DQ DGPLQLVWUDWLYH DJHQF\·V ILQGLQJ IURP EHLQJ
VXSSRUWHGE\VXEVWDQWLDOHYLGHQFHµMatsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. United States
)G )HG&LU 
,Q UHYLHZLQJ DJHQF\ GHWHUPLQDWLRQV ILQGLQJV RU FRQFOXVLRQV IRU VXEVWDQWLDO
HYLGHQFHWKH&RXUWDVVHVVHVZKHWKHUWKHDJHQF\DFWLRQLVUHDVRQDEOHJLYHQWKHUHFRUG
DVDZKROHNippon Steel Corp. v. United States)G² )HG&LU
  see also Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB  86     ´7KH
VXEVWDQWLDOLW\ RI HYLGHQFH PXVW WDNH LQWR DFFRXQW ZKDWHYHU LQ WKH UHFRUG IDLUO\
GHWUDFWVIURPLWVZHLJKWµ 7KH)HGHUDO&LUFXLWKDVGHVFULEHG´VXEVWDQWLDOHYLGHQFHµ
DV´VXFKUHOHYDQWHYLGHQFHDVDUHDVRQDEOHPLQGPLJKWDFFHSWDVDGHTXDWHWRVXSSRUW
DFRQFOXVLRQµDuPont Teijin Films USA v. United States)G )HG
&LU  TXRWLQJConsol. Edison Co. v. NLRB86  
DISCUSSION
3ODLQWLII(XUR60(DUJXHVWKDW&RPPHUFH·V)LQDO5HVXOWVVKRXOGEHUHPDQGHG
EDVHGRQWKHDJHQF\·VXQODZIXODSSOLFDWLRQRIIDFWVRWKHUZLVHDYDLODEOHDQGDGYHUVH
LQIHUHQFHV)LUVW(XUR60(FKDOOHQJHV&RPPHUFH·VDGMXVWPHQWRIWKHDFWXDOZHLJKW
ILJXUHV  3O·V %U DW  (&) 1R   6HFRQG 3ODLQWLII FODLPV WKDW &RPPHUFH·V
DSSOLFDWLRQRIDGYHUVHLQIHUHQFHVWRWKHGRPHVWLFLQODQGIUHLJKWFRVWVIRU86VDOHV
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
ZDVXQODZIXOId.DW7KLUG(XUR60(DOOHJHVWKDW&RPPHUFH·VFDOFXODWLRQRIWKH
FRPSDQ\·VGRPHVWLFIUHLJKWFRVWVUHIOHFWHGDPLQLVWHULDOHUURUId.DW(XUR60(
FODLPV WKDW LW IXOO\ FRRSHUDWHG ZLWK WKH DJHQF\·V UHTXHVWV WKURXJKRXW WKH
LQYHVWLJDWLRQDQGWKDWDQ\GLVFUHSDQFLHVLQLWVGDWDZHUHEHFDXVHWKHFRPSDQ\GRHV
QRWPDLQWDLQUHFRUGVLQWKHIRUPWKDWWKHDJHQF\UHTXHVWHGId.DW3O·V5HSO\%U
DW²(&)1R(XUR60(IXUWKHUH[SODLQVWKDWWKHDJHQF\·VGHFLVLRQWRIRUHJR
DQ RQVLWH YHULILFDWLRQ DQG LQVWHDG LVVXH D YHULILFDWLRQ TXHVWLRQQDLUH KDPSHUHG LWV
DELOLW\WRFODULI\DQ\GLVFUHSDQFLHV3O·V5HSO\%UDW²(&)1R1RQHWKHOHVV
WKHFRPSDQ\GRHVQRWFKDOOHQJHWKHOHJDOLW\RI&RPPHUFH·VXVHRIDTXHVWLRQQDLUH
2UDO$UJ7U(&)1R)LQDOO\(XUR60(GLVSXWHV&RPPHUFH·VILQGLQJ
WKDWWKHUHZDVD´JDSµLQWKHUHFRUGWRILOOZLWKHLWKHUIDFWVRWKHUZLVHDYDLODEOHRUDQ
DGYHUVH LQIHUHQFH  7KRXJK VRPH RI LWV ILJXUHV PD\ KDYH FRQWDLQHG HUURUV WKH
FRPSDQ\ PDLQWDLQV WKDW WKH VDPH LQIRUPDWLRQ ZDV SURYLGHG LQ GLIIHUHQW XQLWV RI
PHDVXUHPHQW DQG WKDW &RPPHUFH FRXOG KDYH XVHG WKDW GDWD WR FRPSOHWH LWV
FDOFXODWLRQ3O·V%UDW²(&)1Rsee also3O·V6XSS%UDW²(&)1R

I. SUMMARY
7RGHWHUPLQHZKHWKHU(XUR60(ZDVVHOOLQJLWVVXEMHFWPHUFKDQGLVHDWOHVV
WKDQIDLUYDOXHLQWKH8QLWHG6WDWHV&RPPHUFHFRQGXFWHGLWVLQYHVWLJDWLRQXVLQJWKH
´DYHUDJHWRDYHUDJHµPHWKRG3'0DW-$DW(&)1R7KDWPHWKRGLV
HVVHQWLDOO\FDOFXODWLQJDQGWKHQFRPSDULQJWKH´ZHLJKWHGDYHUDJHµRIWKHFRPSDQ\·V
KRPHPDUNHWDQG86VDOHV&)5† G 7KHGDWDWKDW&RPPHUFHGUDZV
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
IURP LQ SHUIRUPLQJ LWV FDOFXODWLRQ LV WKH GDWD WKDW LW UHFHLYHV IURP UHVSRQGLQJ
FRPSDQLHV7KHTXHVWLRQQDLUHVWKDW&RPPHUFHVHQGVFRPSDQLHVXQGHULQYHVWLJDWLRQ
LGHQWLI\ZKDWGDWDLWQHHGVDQGLQZKDWIRUP&RPSDQLHVWKDWKDYHEHHQVXEMHFWWR
UHJXODUDGPLQLVWUDWLYHUHYLHZVEHFRPHIDPLOLDUZLWKWKHW\SHVRILQIRUPDWLRQWKH\
DUH H[SHFWHG WR NHHS DQG SURYLGH WR WKH DJHQF\  (XUR 60( DQG LWV SUHGHFHVVRU
FRPSDQ\ (XUR 3ODVWLFV KDYH EHHQ VXEMHFW WR UHJXODU DGPLQLVWUDWLYH UHYLHZV VLQFH
 
:KHQ &RPPHUFH GHWHUPLQHV WKDW SDUWLHV KDYH IDLOHG WR SURYLGH LQIRUPDWLRQ
QHFHVVDU\IRULWVDQDO\VLVVXFKWKDWLQIRUPDWLRQLVPLVVLQJIURPWKHUHFRUGIHGHUDO
ODZSURYLGHVDWZRSDUWSURFHVVIRUWKHDJHQF\WRILOOWKHUHVXOWLQJJDSSee 86&
† H D   )LUVW &RPPHUFH PD\ XVH ´IDFWV RWKHUZLVH DYDLODEOHµ LQ SODFH RI WKH
PLVVLQJLQIRUPDWLRQLI
 1HFHVVDU\LQIRUPDWLRQLVQRWDYDLODEOHRQWKHUHFRUGRU
 $QLQWHUHVWHGSDUW\RUDQ\RWKHUSHUVRQ³
$ :LWKKROGVLQIRUPDWLRQWKDWKDVEHHQUHTXHVWHGE\>&RPPHUFH@
% )DLOVWRSURYLGHVXFKLQIRUPDWLRQE\WKHGHDGOLQHVIRUVXEPLVVLRQ
RIWKHLQIRUPDWLRQRULQWKHIRUPDQGPDQQHUUHTXHVWHG«
& 6LJQLILFDQWO\LPSHGHVDSURFHHGLQJXQGHUWKLVVXEWLWOHRU
$OWKRXJKWKHVHSULRUDGPLQLVWUDWLYHUHYLHZVZHUHQRWIRUPDOO\HQWHUHGRQWRWKHUHFRUGWKH
SDUWLHV DJUHHG DW RUDO DUJXPHQW WKDW WKH &RXUW FRXOG WDNH MXGLFLDO QRWLFH RI WKHP IRU WKH
OLPLWHGSXUSRVHRIFRQILUPLQJ3ODLQWLII·VSDUWLFLSDWLRQLQSULRUUHYLHZV2UDO$UJ7UDW²
(&)1Rsee,eg.PolyethyleneRetail Carrier Bags from Malaysia: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review 2005-2006)HG5HJ 'HS·WRI&RP$XJ
   through Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags from Malaysia: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review 2018-2019)HG5HJ 'HS·WRI&RP$SU
 
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
' 3URYLGHV VXFK LQIRUPDWLRQ EXW WKH LQIRUPDWLRQ FDQQRW EH
YHULILHG>@
Id.6HFRQG86&†H E SHUPLWVWKRVHIDFWVRWKHUZLVHDYDLODEOHWREHFKRVHQ
ZLWKDQDGYHUVHLQIHUHQFHLI´DQLQWHUHVWHGSDUW\KDVIDLOHGWRFRRSHUDWHE\QRWDFWLQJ
WRWKHEHVWRILWVDELOLW\WRFRPSO\ZLWKDUHTXHVWIRULQIRUPDWLRQIURP>&RPPHUFH@µ
$OWKRXJK†H D DQG†H E DUHRIWHQFROODSVHGLQWR´DGYHUVHIDFWVDYDLODEOHµ
RU´$)$µWKHWZRVWDWXWRU\SURFHVVHVUHTXLUHGLVWLQFWDQDO\VHVUDWKHUWKDQWKHVLQJOH
DQDO\VLV LPSOLHG E\ WKH WHUP ´$)$µ  &RPPHUFH ILUVW PXVW GHWHUPLQH WKDW LW LV
PLVVLQJQHFHVVDU\LQIRUPDWLRQDQGLILWZLVKHVWRILOOWKHUHVXOWLQJJDSZLWKIDFWV
WKDW UHIOHFW DQ DGYHUVH LQIHUHQFH DJDLQVW DQ LQWHUHVWHG SDUW\ &RPPHUFH PXVW
VHFRQGDULO\GHWHUPLQHWKDWWKHSDUW\KDVIDLOHGWRFRRSHUDWHE\QRWDFWLQJWRWKHEHVW
RILWVDELOLW\See Zhejiang DunAn Hetian Metal Co. )GDW7KH)HGHUDO
&LUFXLWKDVH[SODLQHGWKDWDFWLQJWRWKHEHVWRIRQH·VDELOLW\LQYROYHVXVLQJ´PD[LPXP
HIIRUW WR SURYLGH &RPPHUFH ZLWK IXOO DQG FRPSOHWH DQVZHUV WR DOO LQTXLULHV LQ >LWV@
LQYHVWLJDWLRQµNippon Steel Corp. v. United States)G )HG&LU
 ,WDOVRUHTXLUHVFRPSDQLHVWR´WDNHUHDVRQDEOHVWHSVWRNHHSDQGPDLQWDLQIXOO
DQG FRPSOHWH UHFRUGVµ RI WKHLU WUDQVDFWLRQV LQ DQWLFLSDWLRQ RI &RPPHUFH·V
DGPLQLVWUDWLYHUHYLHZVId.see also Qingdao Sea-Line Int’l Trading Co. v. United
States)6XSSG &,7 $FRPSDQ\WKDWKDVEHHQVXEMHFWWR
PDQ\LQYHVWLJDWLRQVEHFRPHVIDPLOLDUZLWKWKHW\SHVRILQIRUPDWLRQ&RPPHUFHQHHGV
PDNLQJLWPRUHGLIILFXOWWRMXVWLI\DIDLOXUHWRSURYLGHWKHUHTXHVWHGLQIRUPDWLRQLQ
WKHPDQQHU&RPPHUFHKDVFRQVLVWHQWO\UHTXHVWHGLWCompare 'HI·V%UDW(&)
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
1R GHVFULELQJWKHQXPEHURIDQQXDODGPLQLVWUDWLYHUHYLHZV(XUR60(KDVEHHQ
VXEMHFWWRDQGLQWXUQWKHFRPSDQ\·VIDPLOLDULW\ZLWKWKHSURFHVV with Nippon Steel
Corp.  )G DW  VWDWLQJ WKDW ´LQDWWHQWLYHQHVV FDUHOHVVQHVV RU LQDGHTXDWH
UHFRUGNHHSLQJµDOOFRQVWLWXWHQRQFRPSOLDQFHDQGWKDWWKHVWDQGDUG´DVVXPHVWKDW
LPSRUWHUV DUH IDPLOLDU ZLWK WKH UXOHV DQG UHJXODWLRQV WKDW DSSO\ WR WKH LPSRUW
DFWLYLWLHVXQGHUWDNHQDQGUHTXLUHVWKDWLPSRUWHUV«WDNHUHDVRQDEOHVWHSVWRNHHS
DQG PDLQWDLQ IXOO DQG FRPSOHWH UHFRUGV GRFXPHQWLQJ WKH LQIRUPDWLRQ WKDW D
UHDVRQDEOHLPSRUWHUVKRXOGDQWLFLSDWHEHLQJFDOOHGXSRQWRSURGXFH>@µ 
 ,Q UHVSRQVH WR &RPPHUFH·V LQLWLDO TXHVWLRQQDLUH DQG HDFK RI LWV VXEVHTXHQW
UHTXHVWV IRU LQIRUPDWLRQ (XUR 60( SURIIHUHG WLPHO\ VXEPLVVLRQV WKDW DSSHDUHG
UHVSRQVLYH  2QO\ DW YHULILFDWLRQ GLG LW HPHUJH WKDW WKH GDWD (XUR 60( VXEPLWWHG
FRQWDLQHG HUURUV DQG GLVFUHSDQFLHV  $IWHU GHWHUPLQLQJ WKDW (XUR 60(·V DFWXDO
ZHLJKWDQGLQODQGIUHLJKWGDWDZHUHXQYHULILDEOH&RPPHUFHZDVOHIWZLWKQXPHURXV
JDSV LQ WKH UHFRUG  &RPPHUFH JDYH (XUR 60( RSSRUWXQLWLHV WR SURYLGH LW ZLWK
YHULILDEOHGDWDEXW(XUR60(IDLOHGWRGRVR7KHDJHQF\·VUHOLDQFHRQIDFWVDYDLODEOH
WKHUHIRUHZDVODZIXOXQGHUWKHVWDWXWH. See 86&†H D 
&RPPHUFH WKHQ KDG WR FRQVLGHU ZKHWKHU LW ZRXOG JR WKH IXUWKHU VWHS RI
DSSO\LQJDQDGYHUVHLQIHUHQFHEDVHGRQDILQGLQJRIQRQFRRSHUDWLRQ$V&RPPHUFH
H[SODLQHGLQLWV,VVXHVDQG'HFLVLRQ0HPRLWIRXQGWKDWPRVWGLVFUHSDQFLHVLQ(XUR
60(·VGDWDGLGQRW´ULVHWRWKHOHYHORIZDUUDQWLQJDQDGYHUVHLQIHUHQFHµ,'0DW
-$DW(&)1R+RZHYHUZLWKRQHVHWRIILJXUHV³WKHLQODQGIUHLJKWFRVWV
IRU8QLWHG6WDWHVVDOHV³WKHDJHQF\IRXQGRWKHUZLVH7KHGLYHUJHQFHEHWZHHQWKH
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
GDWD IURP WKH FRPSDQ\·V UHFRUGV DQG LWV YHULILFDWLRQ UHVSRQVHV FRPELQHG ZLWK DQ
DSSDUHQW HIIRUW WR PDVN WKRVH GLVFUHSDQFLHV FRQVWLWXWHG D ´IDLO>XUH@ WR FRRSHUDWHµ
ZDUUDQWLQJWKHDSSOLFDWLRQRIDQDGYHUVHLQIHUHQFHId.DW²-$DW²
see  86& † H E   DOORZLQJ WKH GUDZLQJ RI DQ DGYHUVH LQIHUHQFH ZKHUH D
SDUW\´KDVIDLOHGWRFRRSHUDWHE\QRWDFWLQJWRWKHEHVWRILWVDELOLW\WRFRPSO\ZLWKD
UHTXHVWIRULQIRUPDWLRQµ &RPPHUFH·VOLPLWHGILQGLQJRIQRQFRRSHUDWLRQUHJDUGLQJ
VSHFLILFGLVFUHSDQFLHVLQ(XUR60(·VVXEPLVVLRQZDVVLPLODUO\ODZIXO,WDGHTXDWHO\
H[SODLQHGLQWKH,VVXHVDQG'HFLVLRQ0HPRZKDWGLVWLQJXLVKHGWKRVHGLVFUHSDQFLHV
IURPRWKHUVZKHUHLWGHFOLQHGWRDSSO\DQDGYHUVHLQIHUHQFH,'0DW-$DW
(&)1R%HFDXVH&RPPHUFH·VDFWLRQVZHUHVXSSRUWHGE\VXEVWDQWLDOHYLGHQFH
WKH&RXUWZLOOSUSTAIN&RPPHUFH·VGHWHUPLQDWLRQ
II. COMMERCE’S RELIANCE ON FACTS OTHERWISE AVAILABLE
8QGHU WKH VWDWXWH &RPPHUFH PD\ ´XVH WKH IDFWV RWKHUZLVH DYDLODEOHµ LQ DQ
DGPLQLVWUDWLYH UHYLHZ LI LQIRUPDWLRQ LV QRW DYDLODEOH RQ WKH UHFRUG RU LI D SDUW\
ZLWKKROGV UHTXHVWHG LQIRUPDWLRQ IDLOV WR SURYLGH LQIRUPDWLRQ ´LQ WKH IRUP DQG
PDQQHUUHTXHVWHGµVLJQLILFDQWO\LPSHGHVWKHUHYLHZRULIWKHLQIRUPDWLRQFDQQRWEH
YHULILHG  86& † H D   7KH H[LVWHQFH RI D ´JDSµ LQ WKH UHFRUG VXFK WKDW
&RPPHUFHPXVWORRNHOVHZKHUHIRUWKHLQIRUPDWLRQLVDSUHUHTXLVLWHIRUWKHXVHRI
IDFWVRWKHUZLVHDYDLODEOHZhejiang DunAn Hetian Metal Co.)GDW
(XUR60(DUJXHVWKDWQRQHRIWKHSUHFRQGLWLRQVUHTXLUHGE\WKHVWDWXWHDUH
SUHVHQWKHUHEHFDXVHWKHGDWDWKDWWKHFRPSDQ\SURYLGHGWKRXJKLPSHUIHFWFRXOG
KDYHEHHQXVHGWRFDOFXODWHWKHFRPSDQ\·VPDUJLQV3O·V5HSO\%UDW²(&)1R
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
2UDO$UJ7UDW(&)1R$FFRUGLQJWR(XUR60(´WKHUHZHUHQR
JDSV LQ WKH GDWD MXVW VHYHUDO GLIIHUHQW YHUVLRQV RI WKH GDWD SUHVHQWHG LQ GLIIHUHQW
IRUPVLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWK&RPPHUFH·VYDULRXVUHTXLUHPHQWVµVRWKDW&RPPHUFHZDV
QRWSHUPLWWHGWRXVHIDFWVRWKHUZLVHDYDLODEOH3O·V5HSO\%UDW²(&)1R $W
RUDO DUJXPHQW 3ODLQWLII FRQFHGHG WKDW ´WKHUH·V D JDS RQ WKH UHFRUG ZLWK UHJDUG WR
DFWXDO ZHLJKWµ EXW PDLQWDLQHG WKDW EHFDXVH LW SURYLGHG WKH VDPH LQIRUPDWLRQ LQ
RWKHUIRUPVi.e.LQVWDQGDUGZHLJKWDQGQXPEHURIEDJV´WKH'HSDUWPHQWFRXOGKDYH
XVHGWKDWLQIRUPDWLRQDQGDYRLGHGµDQ\JDS2UDO$UJ7UDW(&)1R
7KH*RYHUQPHQWUHVSRQGVWKDW3ODLQWLII·VXQYHULILDEOHGDWDFUHDWHGDJDSWKDWQHHGHG
WREHILOOHGE\WKHDJHQF\LQRUGHUWRFRPSOHWHLWVFDOFXODWLRQVId.DW²
%RWK SDUWLHV UHLWHUDWH WKHVH SRVLWLRQV LQ WKHLU VXSSOHPHQWDO EULHILQJ  (XUR
60(DUJXHVWKDWLWLVLQWKHVDPHSRVLWLRQDVWKHSODLQWLIILQZhejiangDQGWKDWQR
´JDSµH[LVWHGIRU&RPPHUFHWRILOOSee Zhejiang DunAn Hetian Metal Co.)G
DW7KH*RYHUQPHQWFRQWHVWVWKDWFODLPDUJXLQJWKDWVHYHUDOGDWDVHWVVXFK
DVVDOHVH[SHQVHVLQERWKWKH0DOD\VLDQDQG86PDUNHWVZHUHUHSRUWHGRQO\RQDQ
DFWXDOZHLJKWEDVLVDQGSURYHGXQYHULILDEOH'HI·V6XSS%UDW²(&)1R
7KH*RYHUQPHQWH[SODLQV
>)@RU VDOHV H[SHQVHV (XUR 60( UHSRUWHG LWV UHOHYDQW
QXPEHUV«solelyRQDSHUNLORJUDPactual weightEDVLV«
7KDW LV VLPLODUO\ WUXH IRU WKH JURVV XQLW SULFH YDULDEOH
ZKLFK(XUR60(UHSRUWHGRQO\RQDQactual weightDQGSHU
FDUWRQEDVLV«7KHFRQVLVWHQWPHWULFXQLI\LQJWKHVHVDOHV
UHODWHG YDULDEOHV LV WKDW (XUR 60( UHSRUWHG WKRVH
H[SHQVHVWR&RPPHUFHXVLQJactual weight«7KXVZKHQ
&RPPHUFHZDVXQDEOHWRYHULI\WKHDFWXDOZHLJKWGDWDWKDW
(XUR 60( KDG SURYLGHG LQ VXSSRUW RI WKHVH UHVSRQVHV LW
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
FRQFOXGHGWKDWWKHUHZDVDJDSLQWKHUHFRUGWKDWSUHYHQWHG
LWIURPFRQGXFWLQJLWVFDOFXODWLRQV>@
Id. HPSKDVLVLQWKHRULJLQDO see also ,'0DW²-$DW²(&)1R
,Q Zhejiang, WKH )HGHUDO &LUFXLW KHOG WKDW &RPPHUFH·V UHOLDQFH RQ IDFWV
DYDLODEOH ZDV XQODZIXO ³ GHVSLWH WKH GLVFUHSDQFLHV LQ WKH FRPSDQ\·V UHFRUGV ³
EHFDXVHWKHGDWD&RPPHUFHQHHGHGLQYHULILDEOHIRUPZDVDYDLODEOHHOVHZKHUHLQWKH
UHFRUG7KXVWKH)HGHUDO&LUFXLWKHOGWKHUHZDVQR´JDSµWRILOOWKHDJHQF\VLPSO\
KDG WR ORRN HOVHZKHUH LQ WKH FRPSDQ\·V VXEPLVVLRQV WR ILQG WKH GDWD LW QHHGHG
Zhejiang )GDW+HUHDVWKHDJHQF\H[SODLQHGLQLWV,VVXHVDQG'HFLVLRQ
0HPRLWVUHOLDQFHRQIDFWVDYDLODEOHZDVDUHVXOWRILWVLQDELOLW\WRSHUIRUPWKHPDUJLQ
FDOFXODWLRQEHFDXVHRIDQabsenceRIYHULILDEOHGDWD
,QLWVLQLWLDOTXHVWLRQQDLUH&RPPHUFHUHTXHVWHGGDWDUHODWHGWRWKHTXDQWLWLHV
RIPHUFKDQGLVH(XUR60(VROGLQWKH8QLWHG6WDWHVDQGLQWKHFRPSDQ\·V0DOD\VLDQ
KRPHPDUNHW,QLWLDO4XHVWLRQQDLUH-$ DW²(&)1R(XUR60(
UHVSRQGHGZLWKYDULRXVGRFXPHQWVIURPERWKPDUNHWVLQFOXGLQJVDPSOHLQYRLFHVDQG
SDFNLQJOLVWV(XUR60(6HF$5HVSDW([-$DW²(&)
1R:KDWWKHLQYRLFHVUHIOHFWLVWKDW(XUR60(TXDQWLILHVLWVPHUFKDQGLVHE\WKH
QXPEHURIXQLWV EDJV WKHQXPEHURIFDUWRQVDQGWKHQXPEHURIXQLWVLQHDFKFDUWRQ
(XUR60(6HF$5HVSDW([-$DW(&)1Rsee also3O·V
%ULHIDW(&)1R:HLJKWGRHVQRWDSSHDURQWKHLQYRLFHVEHFDXVH´(XUR60(
GRHV QRW VHOO WR WKH FXVWRPHU E\ ZHLJKW LQ DQ\ ZD\>@µ  3O·V %U DW  (&) 1R 
+RZHYHUZHLJKWGRHVDSSHDURQWKHFRPSDQ\·VSDFNLQJOLVWV3ODLQWLIIH[SODLQVWKDW
WKH ZHLJKWV WKDW DSSHDU RQ WKRVH GRFXPHQWV DUH FDOFXODWHG E\ PXOWLSO\LQJ WKH
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
´VWDQGDUG ZHLJKW SHU FDUWRQµ E\ WKH QXPEHU RI FDUWRQV LQ WKH VDOH ³ QRW E\
LQGLYLGXDOO\ZHLJKLQJHDFKFDUWRQId. 6WDQGDUGZHLJKWWKHUHIRUHUHSUHVHQWVDWEHVW
DQ DYHUDJH  (XUR 60( SURYLGHG &RPPHUFH ZLWK DFWXDO ZHLJKWV EXW WKRVH DFWXDO
ZHLJKWVDOVRZHUHPRUHRIDQDYHUDJH,WZHLJKHGRQHFDUWRQIURPHDFKVDOHVKLSPHQW
DQGPXOWLSOLHGWKDWZHLJKWE\WKHWRWDOQXPEHURIFDUWRQVLQWKHVKLSPHQWWRDUULYH
DWWKH´DFWXDOZHLJKWµId.DW2UDO$UJ7UDW(&)1R(XUR60(
FRQFHGHVWKDW´YDULDWLRQVEHWZHHQVWDQGDUGZHLJKWDQGDFWXDOZHLJKWFDQUHVXOWLQ
GLVFUHSDQFLHV WR VRPH GHJUHH VLQFH DFWXDO ZHLJKWV DQG VWDQGDUG ZHLJKWV PD\
GLIIHU>@µ  3O·V %U DW  (&) 1R   +RZHYHU WKH FRPSDQ\ LQVLVWV WKDW ´RQ DQ
DJJUHJDWHEDVLVµWKRVHGLVFUHSDQFLHVDUH´LPPDWHULDOµDQGGRQRWHYLQFHDQ\´DWWHPSW
E\(XUR60(WRPDQLSXODWHRUPLVUHSUHVHQWLWVUHSRUWHGTXDQWLW\LQIRUPDWLRQ>@µId.
$OWKRXJKLWPD\EHWUXHWKDW&RPPHUFHFRXOGKDYHFRQGXFWHGLWVFDOFXODWLRQ
ZLWK D IXOO DQG YHULILDEOH GDWDVHW RI HLWKHU WKH DFWXDO RU VWDQGDUG ZHLJKW LW KDG
QHLWKHU,QVWHDGWKHDJHQF\KDGVRPHGDWDLQWKHIRUPRIVWDQGDUGDQGDFWXDOZHLJKW
DQGRWKHUGDWDRQO\LQWHUPVRIDFWXDOZHLJKWZKLFKSURYHGLPSRVVLEOHWRYHULI\,'0
DW²-$DW²(&)1R GLVFXVVLQJZKLFKXQLWV&RPPHUFHKDGIRUHDFK
GDWDVHWDQGZKLFKRIWKRVHGDWDVHWVWKHDJHQF\ZDVDEOHWRYHULI\ 1RFRQYHUVLRQ
UDWLRDSSHDUVLQWKHUHFRUGPHDQLQJWKDW&RPPHUFHFRXOGQRWFRQYHUWXQYHULILDEOH
GDWDLQWRDGLIIHUHQWPHDVXUHPHQWXQLWVXFKDVVWDQGDUGZHLJKWRUQXPEHURIEDJV
Id.DW-$DW'HI·V%UDW²(&)1Rsee also 2UDO$UJ7UDW²
(&)1R(XUR60(LVDQH[SHULHQFHGSDUWLFLSDQWLQDGPLQLVWUDWLYHUHYLHZV
7KDW LV ZK\ LW VRXJKW WR SURIIHU LWV GDWD LQ WHUPV RI DFWXDO ZHLJKW ZLWKRXW EHLQJ
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
SURPSWHGE\&RPPHUFH,WZDVWKHVDPHPHWULFUHTXHVWHGDQGXVHGLQSDVWUHYLHZV
'HI·V %U DW  (&) 1R  Compare ,QLWLDO 4XHVWLRQQDLUH DW %² -$ DW
² (&) 1R  &RPPHUFH UHTXHVWLQJ TXDQWLW\ GDWD ZLWKRXW DQ\ IXUWKHU
VSHFLILFDWLRQ  with,QLWLDO4XHVWLRQQDLUH5HVSDW-$(&)1R (XUR
60(SURYLGLQJWKHGDWDLQ´DFWXDOZHLJKWµ ([SHULHQFHGUHVSRQGHQWVDUHH[SHFWHG
WRPDLQWDLQWKHLUERRNVLQDPDQQHUWKDWSHUPLWV&RPPHUFHWRJOHDQWKHQHFHVVDU\
GDWDIRULWVDQDO\VLVNippon Steel Corp. v. United States)G )HG
&LU %\LWVRZQDGPLVVLRQ(XUR60(IDLOHGWRGRVRDQGLQVWHDGVRXJKWWR
XVH DYHUDJHV LQVWHDG RI DFWXDOZHLJKWV2UDO$UJ7U DW ² (&) 1R 
3ODLQWLII·V FRXQVHO H[SODLQLQJ KRZ WKH ´DFWXDO ZHLJKWVµ ZHUH FDOFXODWHG E\
H[WUDSRODWLQJ IURP D VLQJOH FDUWRQ·V ZHLJKW UDWKHU WKDQ ZHLJKLQJ HDFK FDUWRQ 
:KHQ(XUR60(·VDFWXDOZHLJKWGDWDIDLOHGWRYHULI\&RPPHUFHKDGDJDSWRILOOSee
 86& † H D  '  IDLOXUH RI LQIRUPDWLRQ WR YHULI\ SHUPLWV &RPPHUFH WR
UHVRUWWRIDFWVDYDLODEOH %HFDXVHWKHDFWXDOZHLJKWILJXUHVSURIIHUHGE\(XUR60(
SURYHGXQYHULILDEOHDQGQRRWKHUFRPSOHWHGDWDVHWDSSHDUHGRQWKHUHFRUGWKDWZRXOG
DOORZ &RPPHUFH WR FRQYHUW WKH GDWD LQWR D FRQVLVWHQW XQLW RI PHDVXUHPHQW
&RPPHUFHODZIXOO\UHVRUWHGWRWKHXVHRIIDFWVDYDLODEOHWRDGMXVWWKHDFWXDOZHLJKW
GDWD,'0DW²-$DW²(&)1R
III. COMMERCE’S APPLICATION OF ADVERSE INERENCES TO
DOMESTIC INLAND FREIGHT COSTS FOR U.S. SALES
8QGHUWKHVWDWXWH&RPPHUFHPD\RQO\DSSO\DQDGYHUVHLQIHUHQFHDJDLQVWD
SDUW\DIWHUILUVWGHWHUPLQLQJWKDWWKHUHLVDJDSLQWKHUHFRUGDQGWKHQVHSDUDWHO\
ILQGLQJWKDWWKHSDUW\KDV´IDLOHGWRFRRSHUDWHE\QRWDFWLQJWRWKHEHVWRILWVDELOLW\
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
WRFRPSO\ZLWKDUHTXHVWIRULQIRUPDWLRQµSee 86&†H E 7KHLQIHUHQFH
WKDW&RPPHUFHGUDZVPXVWEHVHOHFWHG´IURPDPRQJWKHIDFWVRWKHUZLVHDYDLODEOH.µ
Id.&RPPHUFHLVQRWUHTXLUHGWRPDNHDQ\GHWHUPLQDWLRQRUDGMXVWPHQW´EDVHGRQ
DQ\DVVXPSWLRQVDERXWLQIRUPDWLRQWKHLQWHUHVWHGSDUW\ZRXOGKDYHSURYLGHGLIWKH
LQWHUHVWHGSDUW\KDGFRPSOLHGZLWKWKHUHTXHVWIRULQIRUPDWLRQ.µId.†H E  % 
7KH*RYHUQPHQWDUJXHVWKDW(XUR60(·VUHSHDWHGIDLOXUHWRSURYLGHYHULILDEOH
GDWDIRULWVLQODQGIUHLJKWFRVWVDVVRFLDWHGZLWKLWV8QLWHG6WDWHVVDOHVMXVWLILHGLWV
DSSOLFDWLRQRIDQDGYHUVHLQIHUHQFHXQGHUWKHVWDWXWH&RPPHUFHUHFDOOVWKDW´(XUR
60(·VGRPHVWLFLQODQGIUHLJKWGDWDIRU86VDOHVFRXOGQRWEHYHULILHGµDQGWKDW´(XUR
60(KDGUHSHDWHGO\IDLOHGWRDFWWRWKHEHVWRILWVDELOLW\DQGVHHPLQJO\WULHGWRPDVN
PDWHULDO GLVFUHSDQFLHV EHWZHHQ WKH ILJXUHV LW UHSRUWHG DQG LWV RZQ EDFNXS
GRFXPHQWVµ  'HI·V %U DW  (&) 1R   7KRVH DOOHJDWLRQV UHIHU WR (XUR 60(·V
UHVSRQVH WR WKH YHULILFDWLRQ TXHVWLRQQDLUH DQG WKH VXSSRUWLQJ GRFXPHQWV WKH
FRPSDQ\RIIHUHGWRH[SODLQWKHGDWD&RPPHUFHIRXQGWKDWWKHILJXUHV(XUR60(
RIIHUHGWRVXSSRUWLWVGDWDIRUWKHUDQGRPO\VHOHFWHGVDOHVGLGQRWPDWFKWKHQXPEHUV
WKHFRPSDQ\SURIIHUHGLQLWVLQLWLDOTXHVWLRQQDLUHUHVSRQVH,'0DW-$DW
(&) 1R   7KRXJK WKH FRPSDQ\ RIIHUHG ´VRPH QDUUDWLYH GLVFXVVLRQ RI KRZ WKH
GRFXPHQWVVXSSRUWHGZKDWZDVUHSRUWHGLQWKHGDWDEDVH>@µWKDWH[SODQDWLRQ´IDLO>HG@
WRH[SODLQKRZWKHIUHLJKWFRVWVZHUHDOORFDWHGWRWKHDVVRFLDWHGWUDQVDFWLRQV>@µId.
&RPPHUFH IRXQG WKDW (XUR 60( DWWHPSWHG WR PDVN PDWHULDO GLVFUHSDQFLHV ZLWK
KDQGZULWWHQQRWDWLRQVWKDWDSSHDUHGRQWKHDWWDFKHGVXSSRUWLQJGRFXPHQWV7KRVH
QRWDWLRQV ´DVVLJQHG DQ\ YDULDQFH WR QRQVHOHFWHG WUDQVDFWLRQV VR WKDW WKH VHOHFWHG
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
WUDQVDFWLRQZRXOGDSSHDUFRQVLVWHQWZLWK(XUR60(·VIUHLJKWLQYRLFHV>@µId.7KH
DJHQF\DUJXHVWKDWWKHDSSOLFDWLRQRIDQDGYHUVHLQIHUHQFHZDVDSSURSULDWHEHFDXVH
&RPPHUFH KDG VHQW (XUR 60( ´FOHDU DQG UHSHDWHG UHTXHVWV « WR FRUUHFW QRWHG
GLVFUHSDQFLHVµDQG(XUR60(´PDGHQRVHULRXVHIIRUWµWRGRVR'HI·V%UDW²
(&)1R
(XUR60(GLVSXWHVWKHDOOHJDWLRQFODLPLQJWKDW´WKHDGPLQLVWUDWLYHUHFRUGLV
UHSOHWHZLWKHYLGHQFHWKDW(XUR60(FRRSHUDWHGWRWKHEHVWRILWVDELOLW\DWDOOWLPHV
LQWKHXQGHUO\LQJDGPLQLVWUDWLYHUHYLHZ>@µ3O·V5HSO\%UDW(&)1R,WLQVLVWV
WKDWWKHFLUFXPVWDQFHVVXUURXQGLQJWKH&RYLG3DQGHPLFZKLFKSUHYHQWHGDQRQ
VLWHYHULILFDWLRQGHSULYHGWKHFRPSDQ\RIWKHRSSRUWXQLW\WRSDUWLFLSDWHLQDSURFHVV
ZLWKWKHDJHQF\ZKHUHE\´WKRVHJDSV>LQWKHUHFRUG@FRXOGKDYHEHHQIXOO\H[SODLQHG
DQGGLJHVWHGE\&RPPHUFHRIILFLDOV>@µId.DW3ODLQWLIIDUJXHVWKDW´SUHYHULILFDWLRQ
SUHSDUDWLRQV URXWLQHO\ LQYROYH PDNLQJ QRWDWLRQV KDQGZULWWHQ RU RWKHUZLVH  RQ
SKRWRFRSLHVRIVDOHVDQGRURWKHULQWHUQDOUHFRUGVKLJKOLJKWLQJUHFRQFLOLQJILJXUHVIRU
HDVH RI UHIHUHQFH DQG WR H[SHGLWH WKH RQVLWH YHULILFDWLRQ SURFHVVµ  Id. DW   7KH
*RYHUQPHQW·VFODLPVWKDWWKHQRWDWLRQVDUHLQGLFDWLYHRIDQDWWHPSWWR´PDVNµLVVXHV
LQ WKH FRPSDQ\·V GDWD UHYHDOV DFFRUGLQJ WR (XUR 60( ´D IXQGDPHQWDO
PLVXQGHUVWDQGLQJDERXWKRZWKHRQVLWHYHULILFDWLRQSURFHVVXVXDOO\ZRUNVµId.DW
$WRUDODUJXPHQW(XUR60(FODULILHGWKDWLWGLGQRWREMHFWWRWKHDJHQF\·VXVH
RIDYHULILFDWLRQTXHVWLRQQDLUHLQOLHXRIDQRQVLWHYHULILFDWLRQEXWUDWKHUZDQWHGWR
KLJKOLJKW WKH LQKHUHQW VKRUWFRPLQJV RI WKDW DOWHUQDWLYH YHULILFDWLRQ PHWKRG  2UDO
$UJ 7U  (&) 1R   ,W DOVR FODULILHG WKDW LWV SULPDU\ REMHFWLRQ WR WKH
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
DSSOLFDWLRQRIDGYHUVHLQIHUHQFHVWRWKH86VDOHVGDWDZDVWKHLQFRQVLVWHQF\ZLWK
&RPPHUFH·V ILQGLQJ WKDW RWKHU VLPLODU GLVFUHSDQFLHV WKDW DSSHDUHG LQ WKH KRPH
PDUNHWVDOHVGDWDGLGnotGHPRQVWUDWHDIDLOXUHWRFRRSHUDWHId.DWsee also
id.DW² UHVSRQGLQJ´>F@RUUHFWµZKHQDVNHGLILWZDVWUXHWKDWWKHFRPSDQ\
KLJKOLJKWHG WKH DJHQF\·V DFWLRQ WR GHPRQVWUDWH WKDW ´WKH FDOFXODWLRQV IRU LQODQG
IUHLJKWH[SHQVHVLQWKHKRPHPDUNHWDQGZKDW>WKH\@GLGZLWKGRPHVWLFLQODQGIUHLJKW
H[SHQVHV IRU 8QLWHG 6WDWHV VDOHV >ZHUH@ DSSOHV WR DSSOHV « DQG \HW >ZHUH@ EHLQJ
WUHDWHGGLIIHUHQWO\µ 3ODLQWLIIDUJXHVWKDWWKLVGLIIHUHQWLDOWUHDWPHQW³ZKHUHE\RQH
GLVFUHSDQF\ LV IRXQG QRW WR GHPRQVWUDWH D ODFN RI FRRSHUDWLRQ ZKLOH D VLPLODU
GLVFUHSDQF\ZLWKDQRWKHUGDWDVHWZDUUDQWVWKHGUDZLQJRIDQDGYHUVHLQIHUHQFH³
FRQVWLWXWHVDQDUELWUDU\DQGXQODZIXODSSOLFDWLRQRIDGYHUVHLQIHUHQFHVId.
,QLWV,VVXHVDQG'HFLVLRQ0HPR&RPPHUFHDGHTXDWHO\H[SODLQHGWKHEDVLVIRU
LWVGLIIHUHQWLDOWUHDWPHQWRIWKHGLVFUHSDQFLHVWKDWDSSHDUHGLQ(XUR60(·VLQODQG
IUHLJKWH[SHQVHVIRUKRPHPDUNHWVDOHVDQGWKHODUJHULQFRQVLVWHQF\WKDWLWIRXQGLQ
WKH86VDOHVGDWD&RPPHUFHH[SODLQHG´8QOLNHWKHYDULDQFHVUHODWLQJWRLQODQG
IUHLJKWLQWKHKRPHPDUNHWZKLFKZHUHJHQHUDOO\YHU\VPDOORUFRXOGEHH[SODLQHGE\
URXQGLQJ GLIIHUHQFHV WKH YDULDQFH EHWZHHQ WKH VXSSRUWLQJ GRFXPHQWDWLRQ DQG WKH
GRPHVWLF LQODQG IUHLJKW H[SHQVHV UHSRUWHG LQ WKH GDWDEDVH IRU WKH WKUHH 86 VDOHV
WUDFHV ZHUH QRW LPPDWHULDOµ ,'0 DW  -$ DW  (&) 1R   ´8QGHU WKH
DUELWUDU\ DQG FDSULFLRXV VWDQGDUG WKH FRXUW « GHWHUPLQH>V@ ZKHWKHU DQ DJHQF\·V
GHFLVLRQZDVEDVHGRQDFRQVLGHUDWLRQRIWKHUHOHYDQWIDFWRUVDQGZKHWKHUWKHUHKDV
EHHQDFOHDUHUURURIMXGJPHQWµBaroque Timber Indus. (Zhongshan) Co. v. United
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
States  &,7   Q   LQWHUQDO FLWDWLRQV RPLWWHG   +HUH &RPPHUFH
H[SODLQHG WKH EDVLV IRU LWV GLIIHUHQWLDO WUHDWPHQW RI WKH YDULRXV GLVFUHSDQFLHV WKDW
DSSHDUHGLQ(XUR60(·VGDWD:KHUHGLVFUHSDQFLHVZHUHVPDOODQGFRXOGSRWHQWLDOO\
EH H[SODLQHG E\ URXQGLQJ &RPPHUFH IRXQG GUDZLQJ DQ DGYHUVH LQIHUHQFH ZDV
XQZDUUDQWHG,'0DW²-$DW²(&)1R:KHUHWKHGLVFUHSDQF\
ZDVODUJHUFRXOGQRWEHH[SODLQHGE\URXQGLQJDQGLQFOXGHGKDQGZULWWHQQRWDWLRQV
WKDWDSSHDUHGGHVLJQHGWRREVFXUHWKHGLVFUHSDQF\·VRULJLQ&RPPHUFHGLGDSSO\DQ
DGYHUVHLQIHUHQFHId.DW²-$DW²7KH&RXUWILQGVWKDW&RPPHUFH
FRQVLGHUHGDOOUHOHYDQWIDFWRUVGUHZDUDWLRQDOGLVWLQFWLRQEDVHGRQWKHUHODWLYHVL]H
RI WKH GLVFUHSDQFLHV DQG VXSSRUWHG LWV GHWHUPLQDWLRQ ZLWK VXEVWDQWLDO HYLGHQFH
&RQVHTXHQWO\WKH&RXUWZLOOQRWVHFRQGJXHVV&RPPHUFH·VDSSOLFDWLRQRIDQDGYHUVH
LQIHUHQFHWRWKHODUJHVWGLVFUHSDQF\ZLWKLQWKH86IUHLJKWH[SHQVHGDWDVHW
IV. MINISTERIAL ERROR
7KH ILQDO LVVXH IRU WKH &RXUW·V UHYLHZ LV (XUR 60(·V PLQLVWHULDO HUURU
DOOHJDWLRQ3O·V%UDW(&)1R86&† K UHTXLUHV&RPPHUFHWR
´HVWDEOLVKSURFHGXUHVIRUWKHFRUUHFWLRQRIPLQLVWHULDOHUURUV«>ZKLFK@VKDOOHQVXUH
RSSRUWXQLW\IRULQWHUHVWHGSDUWLHVWRSUHVHQWWKHLUYLHZVUHJDUGLQJDQ\VXFKHUURUVµ
7KHVDPHVWDWXWHGHILQHVDPLQLVWHULDOHUURUDV´DQHUURULQDGGLWLRQVXEWUDFWLRQRU
RWKHU DULWKPHWLF IXQFWLRQ FOHULFDO HUURU UHVXOWLQJ IURP LQDFFXUDWH FRS\LQJ
GXSOLFDWLRQRUWKHOLNHDQGDQ\RWKHUVLPLODUW\SHRIXQLQWHQWLRQDOHUURU>@µId.; see
also  &)5 †  I   &RPPHUFH·V UHJXODWLRQV LPSOHPHQWLQJ WKH VWDWXWH
PDQGDWH WKDW ´>F@RPPHQWV FRQFHUQLQJ PLQLVWHULDO HUURUV PDGH LQ WKH SUHOLPLQDU\
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
UHVXOWV RI D UHYLHZ VKRXOG EH LQFOXGHG LQ D SDUW\·V FDVH EULHIµ   &)5 †
 F  3DUWLHVPD\VXEPLWFDVHEULHIVWRWKHDJHQF\´GD\VDIWHUWKHGDWHRI
SXEOLFDWLRQRIWKHSUHOLPLQDU\UHVXOWVRIUHYLHZ>@µ&)5† F  LL ´7KH
FDVH EULHI PXVW SUHVHQW DOO DUJXPHQWV WKDW FRQWLQXH LQ WKH VXEPLWWHU·V YLHZ WR EH
UHOHYDQWWRWKH>DJHQF\·V@ILQDOGHWHUPLQDWLRQ>@µId. † F  5HTXLULQJPLQLVWHULDO
HUURUV WKDW DSSHDU LQ WKH SUHOLPLQDU\ UHVXOWV WR EH UDLVHG LQ WKH SDUW\·V FDVH EULHI
HQVXUHVWKDWRWKHUSDUWLHVKDYHDQRSSRUWXQLW\WRUHVSRQGWRWKHDOOHJDWLRQDQGWKDW
&RPPHUFHLVDEOHWR´DQDO\]HDQ\FRPPHQWVUHFHLYHGDQGLIDSSURSULDWHFRUUHFWDQ\
VLJQLILFDQW PLQLVWHULDO HUURU E\ DPHQGLQJ WKH SUHOLPLQDU\ GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RU « WKH
ILQDOGHWHUPLQDWLRQ>@µ&)5† H 
(XUR60(GHFOLQHGWRVXEPLWDFDVHEULHIDIWHU&RPPHUFH·VSXEOLFDWLRQRIWKH
SUHOLPLQDU\ UHVXOWV  'HI·V 5HVS %U DW Q (&) 1R $IWHU WKH &RPPLWWHH
VXEPLWWHG D EULHI WR WKH DJHQF\ KRZHYHU (XUR 60( VXEPLWWHG D UHEXWWDO EULHI LQ
ZKLFKLWUHVSRQGHGWRLVVXHVUDLVHGLQWKH&RPPLWWHH·VEULHIDQGDWWHPSWHGWRUDLVH
IRUWKHILUVWWLPHLWVDOOHJDWLRQRIDPLQLVWHULDOHUURUId.see also-$DW(&)
1R%HFDXVHUHEXWWDOEULHIV´PD\UHVSRQGRQO\WRDUJXPHQWVUDLVHGLQFDVHEULHIVµ
DQGDUHEDUUHGIURPUDLVLQJQHZLVVXHV&RPPHUFHUHMHFWHG(XUR60(·VVXEPLVVLRQ
DQGUHTXLUHGLWWRUHVXEPLWLWVUHEXWWDOZLWKWKHPLQLVWHULDOHUURUDOOHJDWLRQUHGDFWHG
See &)5† G  )ROORZLQJ&RPPHUFH·VSXEOLFDWLRQRIWKH)LQDO5HVXOWV
(XUR60(DJDLQWULHGWRUDLVHLWVPLQLVWHULDOHUURUDOOHJDWLRQ2Q0DUFKWKH
FRPSDQ\ VXEPLWWHG D EULHI DOOHJLQJ WKDW &RPPHUFH HUUHG LQ LWV )LQDO 5HVXOWV E\
FDSSLQJWKHFRPSDQ\·VIUHLJKWUHYHQXHH[SHQVHV&RPPHUFHKDGRQO\LQFOXGHGWKH
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
LQWHUQDWLRQDOIUHLJKWH[SHQVHVDVVRFLDWHGZLWKWKHUHYLHZHGWUDQVDFWLRQV(XUR60(
0LQLVWHULDO(UURU0HPRDW-$DW(&)1R(XUR60(DUJXHGWKDWLW
VKRXOGKDYHDOVRLQFOXGHGWKHIUHLJKWH[SHQVHVLQFXUUHGZLWKLQWKH8QLWHG6WDWHVWR
WUDQVSRUW WKH JRRGV WR WKHLU ILQDO GHVWLQDWLRQ 3ODLQWLII·V GDWD KDG LQFOXGHG WKRVH
8QLWHG 6WDWHV WUDQVSRUWDWLRQ H[SHQVHV DQG RPLWWLQJ WKH H[SHQVHV UHVXOWHG LQ D
GHFHSWLYHO\ ORZ H[SHQVH FDOFXODWLRQ IURP ZKLFK WR FRPSDUH 3ODLQWLII·V SURGXFWLRQ
H[SHQVHV7KHUHVXOWLVDSRWHQWLDOO\LQDFFXUDWHO\KLJKGXPSLQJPDUJLQId.
&RPPHUFHILOHGLWVUHVSRQVHWRWKHDOOHJDWLRQRQ0DUFKDUJXLQJWKDW
(XUR 60( IDLOHG WR UDLVH WKH LVVXH LQ D WLPHO\ IDVKLRQ DQG WKHUHE\ IRUIHLWHG WKH
REMHFWLRQ&RPPHUFH5HVSWR0LQLVWHULDO(UURUDW²-$²(&)1R
&LWLQJ&)5† F  DQG&)5† F  &RPPHUFHIRXQGWKDW
SDUWLHVDOOHJLQJPLQLVWHULDOHUURULQWKHSUHOLPLQDU\UHVXOWVPXVWGRVRLQWKHLUFDVH
EULHIVWRWKHDJHQF\Id.DW-$DW(XUR60(GHFOLQHGWRVXEPLWDQ\LQLWLDO
FDVHEULHIIROORZLQJWKHDJHQF\·VSXEOLFDWLRQRILWV3UHOLPLQDU\5HVXOWV7KDWOHIW(XUR
60( RQO\ WKH SRVW)LQDO 5HVXOWV SURFHVV WR UDLVH LWV REMHFWLRQ  2QFH DJDLQ WKH
FRPSODLQWZDVXQWLPHO\EHFDXVH&)5† F  UHTXLUHVSDUWLHVWRUDLVH
DQ\LVVXHVWKDWDUHGHWHFWDEOHLQWKH3UHOLPLQDU\5HVXOWVLQWKHLULQLWLDOFDVHEULHIV
7KH&RPPLWWHHDJUHHVZLWKWKH*RYHUQPHQWWKDW(XUR60(·VIDLOXUHWRWLPHO\
UDLVHLWVDOOHJDWLRQFRQVWLWXWHVIRUIHLWXUHEXWLWDOVRSUHVHQWVDQDOWHUQDWLYHEDVLVRQ
ZKLFK WR XSKROG &RPPHUFH·V GHFLVLRQ  ,W DUJXHV WKDW ´WKH DOOHJHG HUURU LV QRW
¶PLQLVWHULDO·LQQDWXUHµEXWLVLQVWHDG´DIDFWXDODQGPHWKRGRORJLFDOTXHVWLRQµ'HI
,QW·V %U DW  (&) 1R   1RWLQJ WKDWPLQLVWHULDO HUURUV FDQ RQO\ EHHUURUV ´LQ
&RXUW1RFY 6$9   3DJH
DGGLWLRQ VXEWUDFWLRQ RU RWKHU DULWKPHWLF IXQFWLRQ FOHULFDO HUURU UHVXOWLQJ IURP
LQDFFXUDWHFRS\LQJGXSOLFDWLRQRUWKHOLNH>@µWKH&RPPLWWHHSRVLWVWKDW&RPPHUFH·V
GHFLVLRQQRWWRLQFOXGHFHUWDLQFDWHJRULHVRIH[SHQVHVFDQQRWEHDPLQLVWHULDOHUURU
See &)5† I 0HWKRGRORJLFDOFKRLFHVDUHQRWXQLQWHQWLRQDOHUURUVDQG
WKHUHIRUHFDQQRWEHUDLVHGXVLQJWKHPLQLVWHULDOHUURUSURFHVV
7KH &RXUW DJUHHV WKDW WKH DOOHJDWLRQ ZDV ERWK XQWLPHO\ DQG QRW SURSHUO\
FKDUDFWHUL]HG DV ´PLQLVWHULDOµ  :KHQ IDFHG ZLWK D VLPLODU TXHVWLRQ WKH )HGHUDO
&LUFXLWKDVKHOGWKDWWKHLQFOXVLRQRUH[FOXVLRQRIFHUWDLQILJXUHVLQDFDOFXODWLRQWKDW
DUH´QRWDQDULWKPHWLFRUFOHULFDOHUURURUVLPLODULQDGYHUWHQWPLVWDNH«GR>@QRWIDOO
ZLWKLQWKHVWDWXWRU\GHILQLWLRQRI¶PLQLVWHULDOHUURU·µQVD Food Co., Ltd. v. United
States  )G   )HG &LU    ,Q QVD Food WKH SODLQWLII ILOHG D
PLQLVWHULDO HUURU DOOHJDWLRQ IROORZLQJ WKH SXEOLFDWLRQ RI &RPPHUFH·V )LQDO 5HVXOWV
DOOHJLQJ WKDW WKH DJHQF\ KDG PLVWDNHQO\ ´GRXEOH FRXQWHGµ FHUWDLQ H[SHQVHV LQ LWV
FDOFXODWLRQVId.DW2QDSSHDOWKHFRXUWUHMHFWHGLWVDOOHJDWLRQRQWZRVHSDUDWH
JURXQGV)LUVWWKH)HGHUDO&LUFXLWKHOGWKDWE\IDLOLQJWRUDLVHLWVFRQFHUQUHJDUGLQJ
&RPPHUFH·VFDOFXODWLRQEHIRUHWKHSXEOLFDWLRQRIWKH)LQDO5HVXOWV49'KDGIRUIHLWHG
WKHLVVXHId.DW´>:@KHQWKHDOOHJHGPLVWDNHZDVGLVFRYHUDEOHGXULQJHDUOLHU
SURFHHGLQJVEXWZDVQRWSRLQWHGRXWWR&RPPHUFHGXULQJWKHWLPHSHULRGVSHFLILHGE\
UHJXODWLRQµ LW PD\ QRW EH UDLVHG DIWHU WKH SXEOLFDWLRQ RI WKH )LQDO 5HVXOWV DV D
PLQLVWHULDOHUURUSee id. QRWLQJWKDWWKHDOOHJHGHUURUZDV´QHFHVVDULO\SUHVHQWLQ
WKHSUHOLPLQDU\UHVXOWVµ\HWWKHSODLQWLIIGLGQRWREMHFWLQLWVFDVHEULHI 6HFRQGHYHQ
LI49'KDGQRWIRUIHLWHGLWVFODLPWKH)HGHUDO&LUFXLWH[SODLQHGWKDWWKHDOOHJHGHUURU
&RXUW1RFY 6$9  3DJH
ZDVQRWPLQLVWHULDO&LWLQJWKHVWDWXWRU\GHILQLWLRQLWKHOGWKDW&RPPHUFH·VGHFLVLRQ
WRLQFOXGHFHUWDLQILJXUHVLQLWVFDOFXODWLRQ´LVQRWDQDULWKPHWLFRUFOHULFDOHUURURU
VLPLODULQDGYHUWHQWPLVWDNHµDQGWKHUHIRUHFRXOGQRWTXDOLI\DVD´PLQLVWHULDOHUURUµ
Id.
7KH SUHVHQW FDVH LV RQ DOO IRXUV ZLWK QVD Foods  /LNH 49' (XUR 60(
IRUIHLWHG LWV DOOHJDWLRQ E\ RSWLQJ QRW WR ILOH D FDVH EULHI IROORZLQJ &RPPHUFH·V
SXEOLFDWLRQ RI WKH 3UHOLPLQDU\ 5HVXOWV  See id. KROGLQJ WKDW ZKHUH DQ HUURU LV
GLVFRYHUDEOH LQ WKH 3UHOLPLQDU\ 5HVXOWV SDUWLHV PXVW UDLVH LW LQ WKHLU EULHI WR
&RPPHUFH   +RZHYHU HYHQ LI (XUR 60( KDG WLPHO\ ILHOG LWV DOOHJDWLRQ LWV FODLP
ZRXOG VWLOO IDLO EHFDXVH WKH PHWKRGRORJLFDO GHFLVLRQ PDGH E\ &RPPHUFH WR H[FOXGH
FHUWDLQ FRVWV LQ LWV FDOFXODWLRQV LV QRW ´DQ DULWKPHWLF RU FOHULFDO HUURU RU VLPLODU
LQDGYHUWHQW PLVWDNH>@µ  See id. KROGLQJ WKDW ´PHWKRGRORJLFDOµ FKRLFHV DUH QRW
PLQLVWHULDO HUURUV   $V ERWK JURXQGV VXSSRUW &RPPHUFH·V UHMHFWLRQ RI (XUR
60(·V DOOHJDWLRQWKH&RXUWSUSTAINS&RPPHUFH·VGHWHUPLQDWLRQ
CONCLUSION
(XUR60(DOOHJHVWKDW&RPPHUFHWKUHZWKHERRNDWLW,QVWHDG&RPPHUFHDFWHG
ZLWKGHOLEHUDWLRQSDWLHQFHDQGDUJXDEO\VWD\HGLWVKDQGZKHQLWFRXOGKDYH
GUDZQDGYHUVHLQIHUHQFHVPRUHEURDGO\DJDLQVWVXFKDVHDVRQHGUHVSRQGHQW)RUWKH
UHDVRQV VHW IRUWK DERYH WKH &RXUW SUSTAINS &RPPHUFH·V )LQDO 5HVXOWV DV
&RQVLGHUDWLRQRIZKHWKHUWKHDOOHJDWLRQPDGHE\(XUR60(FRQVWLWXWHVD´PLQLVWHULDOHUURUµ
LVUHVROYDEOHDVDSXUHTXHVWLRQRIODZEHFDXVHWKHTXHVWLRQLVSXUHO\OHJDOLQQDWXUHUHTXLUHV
QRIXUWKHUGHYHORSPHQWRIWKHUHFRUGRUDQ\DGGLWLRQDODJHQF\DFWLRQDQGLWGRHVQRWUHVXOW
LQXQGXHGHOD\RUH[SHQGLWXUHRIUHVRXUFHVSee Saha Thai Steel Pipe Pub. Co., Ltd. v. United
States)6XSSG &,7 see also Husteel Co. v. United States)
6XSSGQ &,7 
ERRATA
Euro SME Sdn Bhd v. United States, Case No. 22-00108, Slip-Op. 24-16, dated
February 12, 2024.
Page 35: In line 9, change “field” to “filed” in the sentence “However, even if
Euro SME had timely…”
February 14, 2024