Gilda Indus., Inc. v. United States (2009)

PAGE: 1

UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE

____________________________________________________

ZHENGZHOU HARMONI SPICE CO., LTD., :

JINAN YIPIN CORPORATION, LTD., JINING

TRANS-HIGH TRADING CO., LTD., JINXIANG :

SHANYANG FREEZING STORAGE CO., LTD., LINSHU DADING PRIVATE AGRICULTURAL :

PRODUCTS CO., LTD., SHANGHAI LJ INTERNATIONAL TRADING CO., LTD., and :

SUNNY IMPORT AND EXPORT LTD., :

Plaintiffs, :

v.

: Court No. 06-00189

UNITED STATES, :

Defendant, :

and :

FRESH GARLIC PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION, CHRISTOPHER RANCH, L.L.C., THE :

GARLIC COMPANY, VALLEY GARLIC,

and VESSEY AND COMPANY, INC., :

Defendant-Intervenors. : [Granting in part Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment on the Agency Record, and remanding action to U.S. Department of Commerce.]

Dated: May 13, 2009

Grunfeld, Desiderio, Lebowitz, Silverman & Klestadt LLP (Bruce M. Mitchell, Mark E. Pardo, Paul G. Figueroa, and William F. Marshall), for Plaintiffs Zhengzhou Harmoni Spice Co., Ltd., Jinan Yipin Corporation, Ltd., Linshu Dading Private Agricultural Products Co., Ltd., and Sunny Import & Export Co., Ltd.

Michael F. Hertz, Deputy Assistant Attorney General; Jeanne E. Davidson, Director, and Patricia M. McCarthy, Assistant Director, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice (Mark T. Pittman and David S. Silverbrand); Scott D. McBride, Office of the

PAGE: 2

Chief Counsel for Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Of Counsel; for

Defendant.

Kelley Drye Collier Shannon (Michael J. Coursey and Michael R. Kershow), for Defendant-Intervenors.

OPINION

RIDGWAY, Judge:

In this action, Plaintiffs Zhengzhou Harmoni Spice Co., Ltd., Jinan Yipin Corporation, Ltd., Jining Trans-High Trading Co., Ltd., Jinxiang Shanyang Freezing Storage Co., Ltd., Linshu Dading Private Agricultural Products Co., Ltd., Shanghai LJ International Trading Co., Ltd., and Sunny Import & Export Co., Ltd. - Chinese producers and exporters of fresh garlic - contest the final results of the U.S. Department of Commerce's tenth administrative review of the antidumping duty order covering fresh garlic from the People's Republic of China ("PRC"). See Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Results of New Shipper Review, 71 Fed. Reg. 26,329 (May 4, 2006) ("Final Results"); Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Administrative Review and New Shipper Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Order on Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China (April 26, 2006) (Pub. Doc. No. 462) ("Decision Memorandum").1

Pending before the Court is the Motion for Judgment on the Agency Record filed on behalf

1Because the administrative record in this action includes confidential information, two versions of that record were filed with the Court. Citations to documents in the public record are noted as "Pub. Doc. No. ____," while citations to documents in the confidential record are noted as "Conf. Doc. No. ____." The public version of the administrative record consists of copies of all documents in the record, with all confidential information redacted. The confidential version of the record consists of complete, un-redacted copies of only those documents that include confidential information.

PAGE: 3

of four of the plaintiffs in this matter - Zhengzhou Harmoni Spice Co., Ltd., Jinan Yipin Corporation, Ltd., Linshu Dading Private Agricultural Products Co., Ltd., and Sunny Import & Export Co., Ltd. (collectively "the Chinese Producers").2 In their motion, the Chinese Producers challenge the methodology used in calculating "normal value," as well as various other aspects of Commerce's antidumping determination, and request that this matter be remanded to the agency for reconsideration. See generally Brief in Support of Plaintiffs' Rule 56.2 Motion for Judgment on the Agency Record ("Pls.' Brief"); Reply Brief in Support of Plaintiffs' Rule 56.2 Motion for Judgment on the Agency Record ("Pls.' Reply Brief").3

The Government opposes the Chinese Producers' motion. The Government maintains that Commerce's determination is supported by substantial evidence and is otherwise in accordance with

2Although the Complaint in this action was filed on behalf of seven plaintiffs, the pending Motion for Judgment on the Agency Record was filed only by the four plaintiffs specifically identified above. The other three plaintiffs took no part in briefing or oral argument, and have expressed no views on the issues addressed herein.

As noted above, the four movant plaintiffs are referred to herein, collectively, as "the Chinese Producers." Other garlic producers from the PRC who were involved in Commerce's administrative review, including the three non-movant plaintiffs, are generally referred to simply as "respondents."

3"Normal value" is generally "the price at which the forei...

If you are already a vLex customer, Access Here