Administrative
RHP Bearings Ltd., NSK Bearings Europe Ltd. and NSK Corp., plaintiffs v. United States, defendant, and Torrington Co., defendant-intervenor
26 Ct. Int'l Trade 649·United States Court of International Trade·2002
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
RHP Bearings Ltd., NSK Bearings Europe Ltd. and NSK Corp., plaintiffs v. United States, defendant, and Torrington Co., defendant-intervenor
Court No. 98-07-02526
(Dated July 1, 2002)
[MAJORITY — Tsoucalas, Senior Judge:]
ORDER
Tsoucalas, Senior Judge:
This matter comes before the court pursuant to the decision (April 30, 2002) of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) in RHP Bearings Ltd. v. United States, 288 F.3d 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2002) affirming-in-part, vacating-in-part and remanding the judgment of this court in RHP Bearings Ltd. v. United States (“RHP”), 24 CIT 1218, 120 F. Supp. 2d 1116 (2000).
In RHP, this Court decided several issues, one of which was whether Commerce’s calculation of the profit component of constructed value was valid, with regard to the determination by the Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration (“Commerce”), in Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews of Antifriction Bearings (Other Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Romania, Singapore, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, 63 Fed. Reg. 33,320 (June 18,1998). See RHP Bearings Ltd., 288 F.3d 1334. Specifically, the CAFC remanded the case to this Court with the instruction to remand this case to Commerce so Commerce could: (i) “explain its methodology for calculation of constructed value profit ***[;] and (ii) explain why that methodology comported with statutory requirements.” Id. at 1337.
Accordingly, it is hereby
Ordered that this case is remanded to Commerce to provide the explanations as outlined in RHP Bearings Ltd., 288 F.3d 1334; and it is further
ORDERED that the remand results are due within ninety (90) days of the date that this opinion is entered. Any responses or comments are due within thirty (30) days thereafter. Any rebuttal comments are due within fifteen (15) days after the date the responses or comments are due.