Skip to main content

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Rules in Favor of the Domestic Curtain Wall Industry

Image
By
In so doing, the Court of Appeals sides with the Department of Commerce, the Court of International Trade, and the Curtain Wall Coalition.

Yesterday, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued its decision affirming the determination by the Court of International Trade (CIT) that curtain wall units and parts fall within the scope of the tariffs on aluminum extrusions imported from China. In affirming the CIT’s decision, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) found that (1) the Curtain Wall Coalition (CWC) companies had standing to file the underlying scope request, and (2) the Department of Commerce’s (DOC) original determination that the curtain wall units and components at issue were included as in-scope merchandise was proper.

Several Chinese curtain wall producers, including Yuanda USA, Shenyang Yuanda Aluminum Industry Engineering Co. Ltd., and Jangho Curtain Wall Americas Co. Ltd, appealed the CIT’s decision made last year.   At that time, the CIT heard the Chinese curtain wall producers’ appeal of the original Department of Commerce (DOC) decision on this matter going back to November 2013.  The CIT upheld Commerce’s decision.

In upholding the CIT’s validation of the DOC’s finding that curtain wall units and parts were not excluded from the scope of the Orders as finished merchandise, the CAFC echoed the CIT in finding that it was “nonsensical” to construe “parts for curtain walls” to mean finished merchandise. Finally, the CAFC validated the DOC’s having declined to consider the additional factors in its scope determination, as the DOC had already properly found that the language of the scope and information in the petition and from the investigations were dispositive in resolving the issue.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Victories and Struggles: Our Mission Persists

By
 On December 3, 2024, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) took action in issuing a forced labor finding against Kingtom Aluminio S.R.L. (“Kingtom”).  This victory for U.S. extruders is a culmination of years of effort between the AEC and United Steel Workers (USW), which started with the initial Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) allegation filed in 2019.  As a result of this finding, CBP has authorized all port directors to seize imports of aluminum extrusions from Kingtom.   For almost 15 years the Aluminum Extrusion Fair Trade Committee (AEFTC) has worked on a wide variety of trade activities.  In defending the China I case, the AEFTC has navigated the 232 Tariffs and has worked with other organizations on EAPA allegations, along with circumvention and transshipment issues.  Thank you to all who have contributed time and resources over the years!  However, there will be more work to do.  With a new administration and 2025 fast approa...
Post a Comment
Read more

Section 232 Implications: Get the Latest

By
 Recently, the AEC released a detailed fact sheet outlining the implications of Section 232 tariffs on aluminum imports, available for review on our website here. This document underscores our ongoing commitment to transparency and informed decision-making within our member base. Previously, we updated the 232 Derivative Products List to include a comprehensive breakdown of HTSUS codes and product descriptions, aimed at providing clarity for our stakeholders accessible here . Additionally, The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) within the Department of Commerce established a formal process for the addition of aluminum products designated the USHTS codes. The first window for submission opened on May 1, 2025, and closed on May 15, 2025. After the posting and public comment period occurs the BIS will make a final determination within 60 days. In addition to these regulatory updates, the Trump Administratio...
Post a Comment
Read more

The 232 Takes Center Stage

By
The 232 exclusion requests, objections, rebuttals and surrebuttals process continues with the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC).  Since the exclusion process on aluminum extrusions restarted in June, AEC members have logged more than 500 objections and over 40 surrebuttals with the DOC.  While there have been a few very specific exclusion requests (i.e., hard alloy, seamless tube, etc.), objections have been limited to only one producing company.  As an industry, we have mounted a stellar defense with all exclusion requests receiving three or more objections from member companies.  At this point, there have yet to be any exclusion requests to make it to the final determination and we are hoping to have the first round of results to share at the Fall Management Conference .  However, if we do start to receive results before mid-September, we will make sure to communicate results as they are made available.  The number of 232 exclusion requests greatly decrea...
Post a Comment
Read more