Region: Asia | Americas
Food Product: Seafood
Kw: Vietnam, shrimp exports
October 24, 2016 US court rejects Vietnamese exporter's duty rate challenge The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has unanimously rejected Viet I-Mei Frozen Food Co.'s (Viet I-Mei) challenge of the 25.76% anti-dumping duty assessed on its shipments of shrimp to the US for the fourth administrative review period, the Southern Shrimp Alliance reported.
The administrative review covered shrimp import entries made between Feb. 1, 2008, and Jan. 31, 2009. In the administrative proceeding, Viet I-Mei refused to provide the US Department of Commerce with information in response to questions raised by the agency. Because of the refusal to participate, Commerce assigned Viet I-Mei a 25.76% anti-dumping duty assessment rate.
Viet I-Mei appealed the commerce department's decision, arguing that the agency should have allowed the foreign exporter to withdraw its request for individual examination and should have granted the company the anti-dumping duty assessment rate given to all non-individually reviewed exporters that were able to establish independence from the government of Vietnam.
After the Court of International Trade held that Commerce had acted lawfully and reasonably in assigning a 25.76% anti-dumping duty assessment rate, Viet I-Mei appealed that court decision at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
The ad hoc shrimp trade action committee (AHSTAC) participated in the appeal and represented the domestic shrimp industry at oral argument before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit earlier this summer in defense of the agency's actions.
Viet I-Mei argued that the company no longer wished to participate in the administrative review proceeding because of changes in the company's ownership. In response, AHSTAC argued that other developments were more likely to be the basis for Viet I-Mei's refusal to participate. The Court of Appeals, referring to Viet I-Mei by its former name “Grobest" and AHSTAC as "Domestic Producers", discussed the two different positions in its unanimous opinion.