[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 16, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7749-7750]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02998]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-967; C-570-968]


Aluminum Extrusions From the People's Republic of China: Notice 
of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Scope Ruling and Notice of 
Amended Final Scope Ruling Pursuant to Court Decision

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

SUMMARY: On January 20, 2016, the United States Court of International 
Trade (CIT or Court) sustained the Department of Commerce's 
(Department) third and final results of redetermination,\1\ in which 
the Department determined, under protest, that certain refrigerator/
freezer trim kits meet the description of excluded finished goods kits 
and are therefore not covered by the scope of the Orders,\2\ pursuant 
to the CIT's remand order in Meridian LLC v. United States, Court No. 
13-00018, Slip Op. 15-67 (CIT June 23, 2015) (Meridian IV).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Meridian LLC v. United States, Court No. 13-00018, Slip 
Op. 16-5 (CIT January 20, 2016) (Meridian V), which sustained the 
Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, Meridian 
Products, LLC v. United States, Court No. 13-00018, Slip. Op. 15-67 
(Oct. 29, 2015) (Third Remand).
    \2\ See Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of China: 
Antidumping Duty Order, 76 FR 30650 (May 26, 2011) and Aluminum 
Extrusions from the People's Republic of China: Countervailing Duty 
Order, 76 FR 30653 (May 26, 2011) (Orders).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals 
for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in Timken,\3\ as clarified by Diamond 
Sawblades,\4\ the Department is notifying the public that the Court's 
final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Department's 
Final Scope Ruling on Refrigerator Trim Kits and is therefore amending 
its final scope ruling.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 
1990) (Timken).
    \4\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 
F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
    \5\ See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, 
``Final Scope Ruling on Certain Refrigerator/Freezer Trim Kits,'' 
(December 17, 2012) (Final Scope Ruling on Refrigerator Trim Kits).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective date: January 30, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Terpstra, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 
14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; 
telephone: 202-482-3965.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On December 17, 2012, the Department issued 
its Final Scope Ruling on Refrigerator Trim Kits in which it determined 
that the refrigerator/freezer trim kits imported by Meridian LLC 
(Meridian) did not meet the scope exclusions for ``finished 
merchandise'' and ``finished goods kits.'' \6\ In particular, the 
Department held that because the trim kits at issue consisted of pieces 
of aluminum extrusions plus fasteners and extraneous materials, they 
did not meet either scope exclusion. Therefore, the Department found 
the products at issue to be within the scope of the Orders.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The finished goods kit exclusion states: ``A finished goods 
kits is understood to mean a packaged combination of parts that 
contains, at the time of importation, all of the necessary parts to 
fully assemble a final finished good and requires no further 
finishing or fabrication, such as cutting or punching, and is 
assembled `as is' into a finished product.'' The scope further 
states that, ``{a{time} n imported product will not be considered a 
`finished goods kit'' and therefore excluded from the scope of the 
investigation merely by including fasteners such as screws, bolts, 
etc. in the packaging with an aluminum extrusion product.''
    \7\ See Final Scope Ruling on Refrigerator Trim Kits at 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in further detail in the Third Remand, the Court 
remanded the Final Scope Ruling on Refrigerator Trim Kits three 
times.\8\ Most recently, in Meridian IV, the Court held that the 
Department's long-standing recognition of a ``fasteners'' exception to 
the ``finished goods kit'' exclusion is unreasonable, finding that 
``the inclusion of `fasteners' or `extraneous materials' is not 
determinative when qualifying a kit consistent of multiple parts which 
otherwise meets the exclusionary requirements, as a `finished goods 
kit.' '' \9\ Additionally, the Court explained that there is nothing in 
the scope language that indicates that the parts of a finished goods 
kit cannot consist entirely of aluminum extrusions.\10\ The Court 
explained that ``to qualify as a `finished goods kit', a kit must 
contain every part required to assemble the final finished good, and it 
logically follows that if a kit is imported with all of the parts 
necessary to fully assemble the kit into its final finished form, then 
obviously (and necessarily) some of those `parts' may be fasteners.'' 
\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Third Remand at 6-10.
    \9\ See Meridian IV, Slip Op. 15-67 at 12-13.
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ Id. at 14 (emphasis omitted).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Third Remand, the Department found, in accordance with the 
Court's instructions in Meridian IV, under respectful protest, that 
Meridian's trim kits are excluded from the scope of the Orders as 
finished goods kits because at the time of importation, the kits 
contained all the parts necessary to assemble a final finished good--a 
complete trim kit.\12\ In Meridian V, the Court sustained the Third 
Remand in its entirety.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Third Remand at 14.
    \13\ See Meridian V, Slip Op. 16-5 at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken \14\ as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, 
the CAFC has held that, pursuant to sections 516A(c) and (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 January 20, 2016, judgment in 
Meridian V sustaining the Department's decision in the Third Remand to 
find

[[Page 7750]]

that Meridian's trim kits are excluded from the scope of the Orders 
constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in harmony with 
the Department's Final Scope Ruling on Refrigerator Trim Kits. This 
notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of 
Timken. Accordingly, the Department will continue the suspension of 
liquidation of the trim kits at issue pending expiration of the period 
of appeal or, if appealed, pending a final and conclusive court 
decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Timken, 893 F.2d at 341.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with the Courts instructions in Meridian IV, we 
determine that Meridian's trim kits are excluded from the scope of the 
Orders as finished goods kits.

Amended Final Determination

    Because there is now a final court decision with respect to the 
Final Scope Ruling on Refrigerator Trim Kits, the Department amends its 
final scope ruling. The Department finds that the scope of the Orders 
does not cover the products addressed in the Final Scope Ruling on 
Refrigerator Trim Kits. The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and 
Border Protection (CBP) that the cash deposit rate will be zero percent 
for the refrigerator/freezer trim kits imported by Meridian. In the 
event that the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or if appealed, upheld by 
the CAFC, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate entries of 
Meridian's Refrigerator Trim Kits without regard to antidumping and/or 
countervailing duties, and to lift suspension of liquidation of such 
entries.
    This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 
516A(c)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: February 8, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-02998 Filed 2-12-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P