(a) Introduction. This section sets forth the procedures for requesting an extension of a time limit. In addition, this section explains that certain untimely filed or unsolicited material will be rejected together with an explanation of the reasons for the rejection of such material.
(b) Extension of time limits. Unless expressly precluded by statute, the Secretary may, for good cause, extend any time limit established by this part.
(c) Requests for extension of specific time limit. Before the applicable time limit established under this part expires, a party may request an extension pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section. An untimely filed extension request will not be considered unless the party demonstrates that an extraordinary circumstance exists. The request must be in writing, in a separate, stand-alone submission, filed consistent with § 351.303, and state the reasons for the request. An extension granted to a party must be approved in writing.
(1) An extension request will be considered untimely if it is received after the applicable time limit expires or as otherwise specified by the Secretary.
(2) An extraordinary circumstance is an unexpected event that:
(i) Could not have been prevented if reasonable measures had been taken, and
(ii) Precludes a party or its representative from timely filing an extension request through all reasonable means.
(d) Rejection of untimely filed or unsolicited material. (1) Unless the Secretary extends a time limit under paragraph (b) of this section, the Secretary will not consider or retain in the official record of the proceeding:
(i) Untimely filed factual information, written argument, or other material that the Secretary rejects, except as provided under § 351.104(a)(2); or
(ii) Unsolicited questionnaire responses, except as provided for voluntary respondents under § 351.109(h)(2).
(2) The Secretary will reject such information, argument, or other material, or unsolicited questionnaire response with, to the extent practicable, written notice stating the reasons for rejection.
[62 FR 27379, May 19, 1997, as amended at 76 FR 39275, July 6, 2011; 78 FR 57795, Sept. 20, 2013; 89 FR 101763, Dec. 16, 2024]
Notes of Decisions
Qvd Food Co., Ltd. v. United States, 658 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2011).
· cites it 2× “See 19 C.F.R. § 351.302 (d) (stating that Commerce will not consider untimely filed materials); see also id.”
Essar Steel Ltd. v. United States, 678 F.3d 1268 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
· cites it 2× “19 C.F.R. § 351.302 (d)(1) ("[T]he Secretary will not consider or retain in the official record of the proceeding .”
Grobest & I-Mei Indus. (Vietnam) Co. v. United States, 2012 CIT 9 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2012).
· cites it 2× “On August 7, 2009, Commerce rejected Amanda Foods’ SRC as untimely under 19 C.F.R. § 351.302 (d)(2). 34 Letter from Scot Fullerton, Program Manager, to Amanda Foods (Aug.”
Deacero S.A.P.I. De C v. v. United States, 2018 CIT 155 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).
· cites it 3× “The regulations do address submissions of untimely or unsolicited questionnaire responses, stating that Commerce will "provide, to the extent practicable, written notice stating the reasons for rejection [of untimely or unsolicited material].”
Neo Solar Power Corp. v. United States, 2016 CIT 111 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).
· cites it 10× “On March 21, 2016, Commerce rejected NSP’s request for reconsideration because it found there were no “extraordinary circumstance[s]” under 19 C.F.R. § 351.302 (c) and no “good cause” under 19 C.”
Hangzhou Yingqing Material Co. v. United States, 2016 CIT 118 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).
· cites it 2× “Commerce rejected *1309 this information as untimely and removed it from the record pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 351.302 (d). See id. Commerce’s regulations provide time limits for the parties’ factual submissions.”
Husteel Co. v. United States, 2015 CIT 66 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2015).
· cites it 6× “Pointing to the Department’s regulations, 19 C.F.R. § 351.302 (d), Husteel suggests that Commerce may not retain untimely-filed new factual information on the record unless Commerce extends the time period for filing.”
Mitsubishi Polyester Film, Inc. v. United States, 2017 CIT 70 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017).
· cites it 2× “19 C.F.R. § 351.302 (b) (2012). In addition, it is within Commerce’s discretion “to relax or modify its procedural rules adopted for the orderly transaction of business before it when in a given case the ends of justice require it.”
— 19 C.F.R. § 351.302(c) — 2 cases
— 19 C.F.R. § 351.302(d) — 1 case
— 19 C.F.R. § 351.302(d)(1)(i) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.