An administrative law judge who suspended U.S. Steel Corp.‘s 337 case against 40 Chinese steel companies earlier this year improperly linked the case to the anti-dumping and countervailing duty investigations handled by a separate government agency — the Department of Commerce — according to an International Trade Commission opinion.
The commissioners initially overturned the suspension on Aug. 5, but did not issue their opinion until yesterday.
US Steel’s Anti-Dumping Cases Not Significantly Related
The commissioners, in overturning the suspension of U.S. Steel’s case, determined ITC rules do not allow for the suspension of a 337 investigation simply in order to notify the Commerce Department as required by statute, and that elements of U.S. Steel’s case involving allegations of price fixing and transshipment “are, at most only partially related to anti-dumping and countervailing duties.”
Administrative Law Judge Dee Lord suspended the case on July 6 because Commerce was not notified of the investigation, and because elements involving price fixing and transshipment, at least partially, fell under the scope of Commerce’s antidumping and countervailing duty investigations.
U.S. Steel’s initial petition, filed on April 26, cites allegations of collusion and price fixing, transshipment to evade anti-dumping/countervailing duties, and theft of trade secrets via hacking by Chinese agents.
U.S. Steel is seeking a general exclusion order to block all Chinese carbon and alloy steel products from the U.S. market, a limited exclusion order blocking imports from 40 listed steel companies and a cease-and-desist order for their alleged illegal practices.
U.S. Steel claimed that a hack similar to one that happened in 2011 to it and other companies was carried out to acquire the recipe and production process of a popular automotive steel alloy, dual-phase 980, that Baosteel and other Chinese companies began offering shortly after the hack,