[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 96 (Tuesday, May 19, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28581-28582]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12084]


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

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 With Final Results of 
Administrative Review and Notice of Second Amended Final Results of 
Administrative Review Pursuant to Court Decision

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On April 21, 2015, the United States Court of International 
Trade (``CIT'') issued its final judgment in Home Meridian Int'l, Inc. 
v. United States, Consol. Court No. 11-00325,\1\ and sustained the 
Department of Commerce's (``the Department'') third remand 
redetermination.\2\ Consistent with the decision of the United States 
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (``CAFC'') in Timken Co. v. 
United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (``Timken''), as clarified 
by Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 
(Fed. Cir. 2010) (``Diamond Sawblades''), the Department is notifying 
the public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with 
the Department's Amended Final Results.\3\ The Department is amending 
its Amended Final Results with regard to the calculation of the 
weighted average dumping margin applied to the mandatory respondent, 
Dalian Huafeng Furniture Group Co., Ltd. (``Huafeng''), and the two 
separate rate respondents included in this decision: Nanhai Baiyi 
Woodwork Co. Ltd. (``Nanhai'') and Dongguan Liaobushangdun Huada 
Furniture Factory and Great Rich (HK) Enterprise Co., Ltd. 
(``Dongguan'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Home Meridian Int'l, Inc. v. United States, Consol. 
Court No. 11-00325, Slip Op. 15-34 (April 21, 2015) (``Home Meridian 
III'').
    \2\ See Final Results of Third Redetermination Pursuant to Court 
Order,'' Court No. 14-1251, (March 27, 2015) (``Remand 
Redetermination III'') available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/cafc-1415-1251.pdf.
    \3\ See Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the People's Republic of 
China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of 
Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results of 
Administrative Review Pursuant to Court Decision, 78 FR 72862 
(December 4, 2013) (``Amended Final Results'').

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: May 1, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick O'Connor, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance--International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC, 20230; telephone (202) 482-
0989.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    In the Final Results, the Department valued certain wood inputs 
used by the respondent, Huafeng, with surrogate values and used Insular 
Rattan and Native Products Corporation's (``Insular Rattan'') 2009 
financial statements, among others, to calculate surrogate financial 
ratios.\4\ The CIT twice remanded issues involving the Final Results to 
the Department, and, in its second redetermination, the Department 
valued certain wood inputs used by Huafeng with market economy purchase 
prices and revised the calculation of the surrogate financial ratios by 
excluding Insular Rattan's financial statements from the 
calculation.\5\ On November 14, 2013, the CIT sustained the final 
results of the Department's second redetermination and, in accordance 
with Timken, the Department published a notice of Amended Final 
Results.\6\ The American Furniture Manufacturers Committee for Legal 
Trade and Vaughan-Bassett Furniture Company, Inc. appealed the 
valuation of wood inputs, but not the issue of excluding Insular 
Rattan's financial statements, to the CAFC. On December 1, 2014, the 
CAFC reversed the CIT's decision and vacated the Department's 
redetermination results in which it used market economy purchase 
prices, rather than surrogate values, to value certain of Huafeng's 
wood inputs. The CAFC directed the CIT to reinstate the Department's 
wood valuation in the first redetermination (using surrogate values for 
Huafeng's wood inputs). On January 28, 2015, the CIT ordered the 
Department to file a redetermination with the Court in which it 
continued to exclude Insular Rattan's financial statements from its 
calculations and reinstated the wood valuation from the first 
redetermination. Pursuant to the CIT's order, the Department filed the 
final results of its third redetermination with the CIT on March 27, 
2015 in which it valued Huafeng's wood inputs using surrogate values 
and continued to exclude Insular Rattan's financial statements from its 
calculations.\7\ On April 21, 2015, the CIT sustained the Department's 
Remand Redetermination III.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic of 
China: Final Results and Final Rescission in Part, 76 FR 49729 (Aug. 
11, 2011) (``Final Results'').
    \5\ See Second Redetermination Pursuant to Court Order, Court 
No. 11-00325, dated August 26, 2013 (``Remand Redetermination II'').
    \6\ See Amended Final Results.
    \7\ See Remand Redetermination III.
    \8\ See Home Meridian III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, as clarified by Diamond 
Sawblades, the 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. The CIT's April 21, 2015, 
judgment sustaining the Department's Remand Redetermination III in 
which it valued certain wood inputs using surrogate values, rather than 
market economy purchase prices, constitutes a final decision of that 
court that is not in harmony with the Department's Amended Final 
Results. This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication 
requirements of Timken. Accordingly, the Department will continue the 
suspension of liquidation of the subject merchandise pending the 
expiration of the period of appeal, or if appealed, pending a final and 
conclusive court decision.

Amended Final Results

    Because there is now a final court decision with respect to this 
case, the Department is amending its Amended Final Results with respect 
to Huafeng's weighted-average dumping margin for the period January 1, 
2009 through December 31, 2009. In addition, the Department has amended 
the Amended Final Results for Nanhai and Dongguan, the separate rate 
respondents included in this final court decision. The remaining 
weighted-average dumping margins from the Final Results, as 
subsequently amended,\9\ remain unchanged.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the People's Republic of 
China: Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review, 76 FR 57713 (September 16, 2011).

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Weighted-average
                Manufacturer/exporter                    dumping margin
                                                           (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dalian Huafeng Furniture Group Co., Ltd..............              45.83

[[Page 28582]]

 
Nanhai Baiyi Woodwork Co. Ltd........................              45.83
Dongguan Liaobushangdun Huada Furniture Factory......              45.83
Great Rich (HK) Enterprise Co., Ltd..................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the event the CIT's ruling is not appealed or, if appealed, 
upheld by the CAFC, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate 
entries of subject merchandise based on the revised assessment rates 
calculated by the Department.
    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 
516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: May 11, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-12084 Filed 5-18-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P