[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 20 (Monday, February 2, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5818-5819]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-2182]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-890]


Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the People's Republic of China: 
Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

DATES: Effective Date: February 2, 2009.
SUMMARY: On January 7, 2009, the United States Court of International 
Trade (``CIT'' or the ``Court'') sustained the final remand 
determination made by the Department of Commerce (``Department'') 
pursuant to the Court's remands of the amended final determination of 
the less than fair value investigation of wooden bedroom furniture 
(``WBF'') from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''). See Final 
Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, July 15, 2008 
(``Remand III''); Dorbest Limited, et al. v. United States, Slip Op. 
09-02 (CIT January 7, 2009) (``Dorbest III''). This case arises out of 
the Department's final determination of sales at less than fair value: 
Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the PRC, 69 FR 67313 (November 17, 2004), 
as amended, 70 FR 329 (January 5, 2005) (``Final Determination''). The 
final judgment in this case was not in harmony with the Department's 
Final Determination.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Bolling, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3434.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 5, 2005, the Department published 
its amended final determination and antidumping duty order. See Final 
Determination. On August 1, 2005, the Department issued its voluntary 
remand redetermination wherein it modified the value of labor. See 
Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the PRC: Final Results of Redetermination 
Pursuant to the Court Remand Orders, (August 1, 2005) (``Remand I''). 
On October 31, 2006, the court remanded the Department's Final 
Determination for further administrative proceedings. See Dorbest 
Limited, et al. v. United States, 462 F.Supp. 2d 1262 (CIT 2006) 
(``Dorbest I''). The Department also requested and the Court granted 
voluntary remands concerning the following aspects of the margin 
calculation for Rui Feng Woodwork Co., Ltd., Rui Feng Lumber 
Development Co., Ltd. and Dorbest Limited (collectively, ``Dorbest''): 
The treatment of spare parts; the elimination of metal parts and 
canopies from Dorbest's calculation; and the valuation of raw material 
expenses. On May 25, 2007, the Department issued its final results of 
redetermination. Id.; see also 462 F.Supp 2d 1262 (CIT 2006) Final 
Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, Court No. 05-
00003, May 25, 2007 (``Remand II''). In Remand II, the Department, 
pursuant to the Court's opinion and order, modified certain aspects of 
the Final Determination as follows: (1) Revised the labor rate for 
Dorbest; (2) recalculated Dorbest's resin value; (3) recalculated the 
mirror value; (4) revised the selection of surrogate companies, by 
excluding Evergreen International Ltd. (``Evergreen'') and Jayaraja 
Furniture (``Jayayraja'') from the surrogate financial ratio 
calculations; (5) eliminated the spare parts discount adjustment to 
Dorbest's U.S. price; (6) removed non-scope metal parts from Dorbest's 
normal value calculation; (7) treated certain of Dorbest's incoming raw 
materials as direct material costs rather than as a deduction from U.S. 
prices; and (8) recalculated the separate rate, based on the remanded 
components of the margin calculation challenged by the litigants.
    On February 27, 2008, the Court remanded the Department's Final 
Determination for further administrative proceedings. See Dorbest 
Limited, et al. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 05-cv-00003, Slip 
Op. 08-24 (February 27, 2008) (``Dorbest et al. v. United States'') 
(``Dorbest II''). The Department requested, and the Court granted, a 
voluntary remand on the valuation of Dorbest's cardboard. Id.
    On July 15, 2008, the Department issued its final results of 
redetermination pursuant to Dorbest II. See Final Results of 
Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, July 15, 2008 (``Remand 
III''). In Remand III, the Department made the following modifications 
to its Final Determination: (1) Recalculated Dorbest's cardboard value; 
(2) revised the selection of surrogate companies by excluding Fusion 
Design Private Ltd. (``Fusion Design''), DnD's Fine Furniture Pvt., 
Ltd. (``DnD''), Nizamuddin Furniture Private Ltd. (``Nizamuddin''), and 
Swaran Furniture Ltd. (``Swaran'') from the surrogate ratio 
calculations; and (3) recalculated the separate rate pursuant to the 
Court's instructions.
    On January 7, 2009, the Court sustained Remand III. The revised 
antidumping duty margins are as follows: For Dorbest is 2.92 percent; 
Lung Dong Furniture Co., Ltd. and Dongguan Dong He Furniture Co., Ltd. 
is 2.71 percent; Shing Mark Enterprise Co., Ltd., is 5.20 percent; 
Starcorp, is 17.50 percent; and the revised margin for the parties that 
received separate rates is 6.78 percent.

Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken, the Court of Appeals for the Federal 
Circuit (``CAFC'') held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff 
Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''), the Department must publish a 
notice of a court decision that is not ``in harmony'' with a Department 
determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a 
``conclusive'' court decision. See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 
F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (``Timken''). The CIT's decision in Dorbest 
III on January 7, 2009, constitutes a final decision of that court that 
is not in harmony with the Department's final determination of sales at 
less than fair value. This notice is published in fulfillment of the 
publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, the Department will 
continue the suspension of liquidation of enjoined entries pending the 
exhaustion of all appellate rights. In the event the CIT's ruling is 
not appealed, or if appealed, upheld by the CAFC, the Department will 
publish an amended final determination.
    This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 
516A(c)(1) of the Act.


[[Page 5819]]


    Dated: January 26, 2009.
Ronald Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-2182 Filed 1-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P