19 U.S.C. § 1677b

Normal value

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 19 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) DeterminationIn determining under this subtitle whether subject merchandise is being, or is likely to be, sold at less than fair value, a fair comparison shall be made between the export price or constructed export price and normal value. In order to achieve a fair comparison with the export price or constructed export price, normal value shall be determined as follows:(1) Determination of normal value(A) In general

The normal value of the subject merchandise shall be the price described in subparagraph (B), at a time reasonably corresponding to the time of the sale used to determine the export price or constructed export price under section 1677a(a) or (b) of this title.

(B) PriceThe price referred to in subparagraph (A) is—(i) the price at which the foreign like product is first sold (or, in the absence of a sale, offered for sale) for consumption in the exporting country, in the usual commercial quantities and in the ordinary course of trade and, to the extent practicable, at the same level of trade as the export price or constructed export price, or(ii) in a case to which subparagraph (C) applies, the price at which the foreign like product is so sold (or offered for sale) for consumption in a country other than the exporting country or the United States, if—(I) such price is representative,(II) the aggregate quantity (or, if quantity is not appropriate, value) of the foreign like product sold by the exporter or producer in such other country is 5 percent or more of the aggregate quantity (or value) of the subject merchandise sold in the United States or for export to the United States, and(III) the administering authority does not determine that the particular market situation prevents a proper comparison with the export price or constructed export price.(C) Third country salesThis subparagraph applies when—(i) the foreign like product is not sold (or offered for sale) for consumption in the exporting country as described in subparagraph (B)(i),(ii) the administering authority determines that the aggregate quantity (or, if quantity is not appropriate, value) of the foreign like product sold in the exporting country is insufficient to permit a proper comparison with the sales of the subject merchandise to the United States, or(iii) the particular market situation in the exporting country does not permit a proper comparison with the export price or constructed export price.For purposes of clause (ii), the aggregate quantity (or value) of the foreign like product sold in the exporting country shall normally be considered to be insufficient if such quantity (or value) is less than 5 percent of the aggregate quantity (or value) of sales of the subject merchandise to the United States.(2) Fictitious markets

No pretended sale or offer for sale, and no sale or offer for sale intended to establish a fictitious market, shall be taken into account in determining normal value. The occurrence of different movements in the prices at which different forms of the foreign like product are sold (or, in the absence of sales, offered for sale) in the exporting country after the issuance of an antidumping duty order may be considered by the administering authority as evidence of the establishment of a fictitious market for the foreign like product if the movement in such prices appears to reduce the amount by which the normal value exceeds the export price (or the constructed export price) of the subject merchandise.

(3) Exportation from an intermediate countryWhere the subject merchandise is exported to the United States from an intermediate country, normal value shall be determined in the intermediate country, except that normal value may be determined in the country of origin of the subject merchandise if—(A) the producer knew at the time of the sale that the subject merchandise was destined for exportation;(B) the subject merchandise is merely transshipped through the intermediate country;(C) sales of the foreign like product in the intermediate country do not satisfy the conditions of paragraph (1)(C); or(D) the foreign like product is not produced in the intermediate country.(4) Use of constructed value

If the administering authority determines that the normal value of the subject merchandise cannot be determined under paragraph (1)(B)(i), then, notwithstanding paragraph (1)(B)(ii), the normal value of the subject merchandise may be the constructed value of that merchandise, as determined under subsection (e).

(5) Indirect sales or offers for sale

If the foreign like product is sold or, in the absence of sales, offered for sale through an affiliated party, the prices at which the foreign like product is sold (or offered for sale) by such affiliated party may be used in determining normal value.

(6) AdjustmentsThe price described in paragraph (1)(B) shall be—(A) increased by the cost of all containers and coverings and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the subject merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States;(B) reduced by—(i) when included in the price described in paragraph (1)(B), the cost of all containers and coverings and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the foreign like product in condition packed ready for shipment to the place of delivery to the purchaser,(ii) the amount, if any, included in the price described in paragraph (1)(B), attributable to any additional costs, charges, and expenses incident to bringing the foreign like product from the original place of shipment to the place of delivery to the purchaser, and(iii) the amount of any taxes imposed directly upon the foreign like product or components thereof which have been rebated, or which have not been collected, on the subject merchandise, but only to the extent that such taxes are added to or included in the price of the foreign like product, and(C) increased or decreased by the amount of any difference (or lack thereof) between the export price or constructed export price and the price described in paragraph (1)(B) (other than a difference for which allowance is otherwise provided under this section) that is established to the satisfaction of the administering authority to be wholly or partly due to—(i) the fact that the quantities in which the subject merchandise is sold or agreed to be sold to the United States are greater than or less than the quantities in which the foreign like product is sold, agreed to be sold, or offered for sale,(ii) the fact that merchandise described in subparagraph (B) or (C) of section 1677(16) of this title is used in determining normal value, or(iii) other differences in the circumstances of sale.(7) Additional adjustments(A) Level of tradeThe price described in paragraph (1)(B) shall also be increased or decreased to make due allowance for any difference (or lack thereof) between the export price or constructed export price and the price described in paragraph (1)(B) (other than a difference for which allowance is otherwise made under this section) that is shown to be wholly or partly due to a difference in level of trade between the export price or constructed export price and normal value, if the difference in level of trade—(i) involves the performance of different selling activities; and(ii) is demonstrated to affect price comparability, based on a pattern of consistent price differences between sales at different levels of trade in the country in which normal value is determined.In a case described in the preceding sentence, the amount of the adjustment shall be based on the price differences between the two levels of trade in the country in which normal value is determined.(B) Constructed export price offset

When normal value is established at a level of trade which constitutes a more advanced stage of distribution than the level of trade of the constructed export price, but the data available do not provide an appropriate basis to determine under subparagraph (A)(ii) a level of trade adjustment, normal value shall be reduced by the amount of indirect selling expenses incurred in the country in which normal value is determined on sales of the foreign like product but not more than the amount of such expenses for which a deduction is made under section 1677a(d)(1)(D) of this title.

(8) Adjustments to constructed value

Constructed value as determined under subsection (e), may be adjusted, as appropriate, pursuant to this subsection.

(b) Sales at less than cost of production(1) Determination; sales disregardedWhenever the administering authority has reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like product under consideration for the determination of normal value have been made at prices which represent less than the cost of production of that product, the administering authority shall determine whether, in fact, such sales were made at less than the cost of production. If the administering authority determines that sales made at less than the cost of production—(A) have been made within an extended period of time in substantial quantities, and(B) were not at prices which permit recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time,such sales may be disregarded in the determination of normal value. Whenever such sales are disregarded, normal value shall be based on the remaining sales of the foreign like product in the ordinary course of trade. If no sales made in the ordinary course of trade remain, the normal value shall be based on the constructed value of the merchandise.(2) Definitions and special rulesFor purposes of this subsection—(A) Reasonable grounds to believe or suspect(i) Review

In a review conducted under section 1675 of this title involving a specific exporter, there are reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like product have been made at prices that are less than the cost of production of the product if the administering authority disregarded some or all of the exporter’s sales pursuant to paragraph (1) in the investigation or, if a review has been completed, in the most recently completed review.

(ii) Requests for information

In an investigation initiated under section 1673a of this title or a review conducted under section 1675 of this title, the administering authority shall request information necessary to calculate the constructed value and cost of production under subsections (e) and (f) to determine whether there are reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like product have been made at prices that represent less than the cost of production of the product.

(B) Extended period of time

The term “extended period of time” means a period that is normally 1 year, but not less than 6 months.

(C) Substantial quantitiesSales made at prices below the cost of production have been made in substantial quantities if—(i) the volume of such sales represents 20 percent or more of the volume of sales under consideration for the determination of normal value, or(ii) the weighted average per unit price of the sales under consideration for the determination of normal value is less than the weighted average per unit cost of production for such sales.(D) Recovery of costs

If prices which are below the per unit cost of production at the time of sale are above the weighted average per unit cost of production for the period of investigation or review, such prices shall be considered to provide for recovery of costs within a reasonable period of time.

(3) Calculation of cost of productionFor purposes of this part, the cost of production shall be an amount equal to the sum of—(A) the cost of materials and of fabrication or other processing of any kind employed in producing the foreign like product, during a period which would ordinarily permit the production of that foreign like product in the ordinary course of business;(B) an amount for selling, general, and administrative expenses based on actual data pertaining to production and sales of the foreign like product by the exporter in question; and(C) the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature, and all other expenses incidental to placing the foreign like product in condition packed ready for shipment.For purposes of subparagraph (A), if the normal value is based on the price of the foreign like product sold for consumption in a country other than the exporting country, the cost of materials shall be determined without regard to any internal tax in the exporting country imposed on such materials or their disposition which are remitted or refunded upon exportation.(c) Nonmarket economy countries(1) In generalIf—(A) the subject merchandise is exported from a nonmarket economy country, and(B) the administering authority finds that available information does not permit the normal value of the subject merchandise to be determined under subsection (a),the administering authority shall determine the normal value of the subject merchandise on the basis of the value of the factors of production utilized in producing the merchandise and to which shall be added an amount for general expenses and profit plus the cost of containers, coverings, and other expenses. Except as provided in paragraph (2), the valuation of the factors of production shall be based on the best available information regarding the values of such factors in a market economy country or countries considered to be appropriate by the administering authority.(2) ExceptionIf the administering authority finds that the available information is inadequate for purposes of determining the normal value of subject merchandise under paragraph (1), the administering authority shall determine the normal value on the basis of the price at which merchandise that is—(A) comparable to the subject merchandise, and(B) produced in one or more market economy countries that are at a level of economic development comparable to that of the nonmarket economy country,is sold in other countries, including the United States.(3) Factors of productionFor purposes of paragraph (1), the factors of production utilized in producing merchandise include, but are not limited to—(A) hours of labor required,(B) quantities of raw materials employed,(C) amounts of energy and other utilities consumed, and(D) representative capital cost, including depreciation.(4) Valuation of factors of productionThe administering authority, in valuing factors of production under paragraph (1), shall utilize, to the extent possible, the prices or costs of factors of production in one or more market economy countries that are—(A) at a level of economic development comparable to that of the nonmarket economy country, and(B) significant producers of comparable merchandise.(5) Discretion to disregard certain price or cost values

In valuing the factors of production under paragraph (1) for the subject merchandise, the administering authority may disregard price or cost values without further investigation if the administering authority has determined that broadly available export subsidies existed or particular instances of subsidization occurred with respect to those price or cost values or if those price or cost values were subject to an antidumping order.

(d) Special rule for certain multinational corporationsWhenever, in the course of an investigation under this subtitle, the administering authority determines that—(1) subject merchandise exported to the United States is being produced in facilities which are owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by a person, firm, or corporation which also owns or controls, directly or indirectly, other facilities for the production of the foreign like product which are located in another country or countries,(2) subsection (a)(1)(C) applies, and(3) the normal value of the foreign like product produced in one or more of the facilities outside the exporting country is higher than the normal value of the foreign like product produced in the facilities located in the exporting country,it shall determine the normal value of the subject merchandise by reference to the normal value at which the foreign like product is sold in substantial quantities from one or more facilities outside the exporting country. The administering authority, in making any determination under this paragraph, shall make adjustments for the difference between the cost of production (including taxes, labor, materials, and overhead) of the foreign like product produced in facilities outside the exporting country and costs of production of the foreign like product produced in facilities in the exporting country, if such differences are demonstrated to its satisfaction. For purposes of this subsection, in determining the normal value of the foreign like product produced in a country outside of the exporting country, the administering authority shall determine its price at the time of exportation from the exporting country and shall make any adjustments required by subsection (a) for the cost of all containers and coverings and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States by reference to such costs in the exporting country.(e) Constructed valueFor purposes of this subtitle, the constructed value of imported merchandise shall be an amount equal to the sum of—(1) the cost of materials and fabrication or other processing of any kind employed in producing the merchandise, during a period which would ordinarily permit the production of the merchandise in the ordinary course of trade;(2)(A) the actual amounts incurred and realized by the specific exporter or producer being examined in the investigation or review for selling, general, and administrative expenses, and for profits, in connection with the production and sale of a foreign like product, in the ordinary course of trade, for consumption in the foreign country, or(B) if actual data are not available with respect to the amounts described in subparagraph (A), then—(i) the actual amounts incurred and realized by the specific exporter or producer being examined in the investigation or review for selling, general, and administrative expenses, and for profits, in connection with the production and sale, for consumption in the foreign country, of merchandise that is in the same general category of products as the subject merchandise,(ii) the weighted average of the actual amounts incurred and realized by exporters or producers that are subject to the investigation or review (other than the exporter or producer described in clause (i)) for selling, general, and administrative expenses, and for profits, in connection with the production and sale of a foreign like product, in the ordinary course of trade, for consumption in the foreign country, or(iii) the amounts incurred and realized for selling, general, and administrative expenses, and for profits, based on any other reasonable method, except that the amount allowed for profit may not exceed the amount normally realized by exporters or producers (other than the exporter or producer described in clause (i)) in connection with the sale, for consumption in the foreign country, of merchandise that is in the same general category of products as the subject merchandise; and(3) the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature, and all other expenses incidental to placing the subject merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States.For purposes of paragraph (1), if a particular market situation exists such that the cost of materials and fabrication or other processing of any kind does not accurately reflect the cost of production in the ordinary course of trade, the administering authority may use another calculation methodology under this part or any other calculation methodology. For purposes of paragraph (1), the cost of materials shall be determined without regard to any internal tax in the exporting country imposed on such materials or their disposition that is remitted or refunded upon exportation of the subject merchandise produced from such materials.(f) Special rules for calculation of cost of production and for calculation of constructed valueFor purposes of subsections (b) and (e).— 11 So in original. The period preceding the dash probably should not appear.(1) Costs(A) In general

Costs shall normally be calculated based on the records of the exporter or producer of the merchandise, if such records are kept in accordance with the generally accepted accounting principles of the exporting country (or the producing country, where appropriate) and reasonably reflect the costs associated with the production and sale of the merchandise. The administering authority shall consider all available evidence on the proper allocation of costs, including that which is made available by the exporter or producer on a timely basis, if such allocations have been historically used by the exporter or producer, in particular for establishing appropriate amortization and depreciation periods, and allowances for capital expenditures and other development costs.

(B) Nonrecurring costs

Costs shall be adjusted appropriately for those nonrecurring costs that benefit current or future production, or both.

Costs shall be adjusted appropriately for circumstances in which costs incurred during the time period covered by the investigation or review are affected by startup operations.

(ii) Startup operationsAdjustments shall be made for startup operations only where—(I) a producer is using new production facilities or producing a new product that requires substantial additional investment, and(II) production levels are limited by technical factors associated with the initial phase of commercial production. For purposes of subclause (II), the initial phase of commercial production ends at the end of the startup period. In determining whether commercial production levels have been achieved, the administering authority shall consider factors unrelated to startup operations that might affect the volume of production processed, such as demand, seasonality, or business cycles.(iii) Adjustment for startup operations

The adjustment for startup operations shall be made by substituting the unit production costs incurred with respect to the merchandise at the end of the startup period for the unit production costs incurred during the startup period. If the startup period extends beyond the period of the investigation or review under this subtitle, the administering authority shall use the most recent cost of production data that it reasonably can obtain, analyze, and verify without delaying the timely completion of the investigation or review. For purposes of this subparagraph, the startup period ends at the point at which the level of commercial production that is characteristic of the merchandise, producer, or industry concerned is achieved.

(2) Transactions disregarded

A transaction directly or indirectly between affiliated persons may be disregarded if, in the case of any element of value required to be considered, the amount representing that element does not fairly reflect the amount usually reflected in sales of merchandise under consideration in the market under consideration. If a transaction is disregarded under the preceding sentence and no other transactions are available for consideration, the determination of the amount shall be based on the information available as to what the amount would have been if the transaction had occurred between persons who are not affiliated.

(3) Major input rule

If, in the case of a transaction between affiliated persons involving the production by one of such persons of a major input to the merchandise, the administering authority has reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that an amount represented as the value of such input is less than the cost of production of such input, then the administering authority may determine the value of the major input on the basis of the information available regarding such cost of production, if such cost is greater than the amount that would be determined for such input under paragraph (2).

(June 17, 1930, ch. 497, title VII, § 773, as added Pub. L. 96–39, title I, § 101, July 26, 1979, 93 Stat. 182; amended Pub. L. 98–573, title VI, §§ 615, 620(b), Oct. 30, 1984, 98 Stat. 3036, 3039; Pub. L. 99–514, title XVIII, § 1886(a)(11), Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2922; Pub. L. 100–418, title I, §§ 1316(a), 1318, 1319, Aug. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 1186, 1189; Pub. L. 103–465, title II, § 224, Dec. 8, 1994, 108 Stat. 4878; Pub. L. 114–27, title V, §§ 504(b), (c), 505, June 29, 2015, 129 Stat. 385.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2015—Subsec. (a)(1)(B)(ii)(III). Pub. L. 114–27, § 504(b), which directed amendment of subcl. (III) by striking out “in such other country.”, was executed by striking out “in such other country” after “particular market situation” to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

Subsec. (b)(2)(A). Pub. L. 114–27, § 505(a), added subpar. (A) and struck out former subpar. (A). Prior to amendment, text read as follows: “There are reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like product were made at prices that are less than the cost of production of the product, if—

“(i) in an investigation initiated under section 1673a of this title or a review conducted under section 1675 of this title, an interested party described in subparagraph (C), (D), (E), (F), or (G) of section 1677(9) of this title provides information, based upon observed prices or constructed prices or costs, that sales of the foreign like product under consideration for the determination of normal value have been made at prices which represent less than the cost of production of the product; or

“(ii) in a review conducted under section 1675 of this title involving a specific exporter, the administering authority disregarded some or all of the exporter’s sales pursuant to paragraph (1) in the investigation or if a review has been completed, in the most recently completed review.”

Subsec. (c)(5). Pub. L. 114–27, § 505(b), added par. (5).

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 114–27, § 504(c)(2), in concluding provisions, substituted “For purposes of paragraph (1), if a particular market situation exists such that the cost of materials and fabrication or other processing of any kind does not accurately reflect the cost of production in the ordinary course of trade, the administering authority may use another calculation methodology under this part or any other calculation methodology. For purposes of paragraph (1), the cost of materials shall be determined without regard to any internal tax in the exporting country imposed on such materials or their disposition that is remitted or refunded upon exportation of the subject merchandise produced from such materials.” for “For purposes of paragraph (1), the cost of materials shall be determined without regard to any internal tax in the exporting country imposed on such materials or their disposition which are remitted or refunded upon exportation of the subject merchandise produced from such materials.”

Subsec. (e)(1). Pub. L. 114–27, § 504(c)(1), substituted “trade” for “business”.

1994—Pub. L. 103–465 amended section generally, substituting present provisions for provisions relating to foreign market value, which provided for determination of value in subsec. (a), sales at less than cost of production in subsec. (b), treatment of merchandise from nonmarket economy countries in subsec. (c), special rule for certain multinational corporations in subsec. (d), determination of constructed value in subsec. (e), and exportation from an intermediate country in subsec. (f).

1988—Subsec. (a)(5). Pub. L. 100–418, § 1319, added par. (5).

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 100–418, § 1316(a), amended subsec. (c) generally, substituting provisions relating to nonmarket economy countries, for provisions relating to State-controlled economies.

Subsec. (e)(2) to (4). Pub. L. 100–418, § 1318, substituted “(4)” for “(3)” wherever appearing in par. (2), added par. (3), and redesignated former par. (3) as (4) and in introductory provisions substituted “paragraphs (2) and (3)” for “paragraph (2)”.

1986—Subsecs. (f), (g). Pub. L. 99–514 redesignated subsec. (g) as (f).

1984—Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 98–573, § 615(1), substituted “time such merchandise is first sold within the United States by the person for whom (or for whose account) the merchandise is imported to any other person who is not described in subsection (e)(3) of this section with respect to such person” for “time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States” in provisions before subpar. (A).

Subsecs. (a)(1)(A), (4)(A), (e)(1)(B). Pub. L. 98–573, § 615(2), substituted “commercial quantities” for “wholesale quantities” wherever appearing.

Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 98–573, § 620(b), struck out subsec. (f) which related to the authority to use sampling techniques and to disregard insignificant adjustments.

Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 98–573, § 615(3), added subsec. (g).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1994 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 103–465 effective, except as otherwise provided, on the date on which the WTO Agreement enters into force with respect to the United States (Jan. 1, 1995), and applicable with respect to investigations, reviews, and inquiries initiated and petitions filed under specified provisions of this chapter after such date, see section 291 of Pub. L. 103–465, set out as a note under section 1671 of this title.

Effective Date of 1988 Amendment

Amendment by sections 1316(a) and 1318 of Pub. L. 100–418 applicable with respect to investigations initiated after Aug. 23, 1988, and to reviews initiated under section 1673e(c) or 1675 of this title after Aug. 23, 1988, and amendment by section 1319 of Pub. L. 100–418 applicable with respect to reviews initiated under section 1673e(c) or 1675 of this title after Aug. 23, 1988, and to reviews initiated under such sections which are pending on Aug. 23, 1988, and in which a request for revocation is pending on Aug. 23, 1988, see section 1337(b), (f) of Pub. L. 100–418, set out as a note under section 1671 of this title.

Effective Date of 1984 Amendment

Amendment by section 615 of Pub. L. 98–573 effective Oct. 30, 1984, and amendment by section 620(b) of Pub. L. 98–573 applicable with respect to investigations initiated by petition or by the administering authority under parts I and II of this subtitle, and to reviews begun under section 1675 of this title, on or after Oct. 30, 1984, see section 626(a), (b)(1) of Pub. L. 98–573, as amended, set out as a note under section 1671 of this title.

Plan Amendments Not Required Until January 1, 1989

For provisions directing that if any amendments made by subtitle A or subtitle C of title XI [§§ 1101–1147 and 1171–1177] or title XVIII [§§ 1801–1899A] of Pub. L. 99–514 require an amendment to any plan, such plan amendment shall not be required to be made before the first plan year beginning on or after Jan. 1, 1989, see section 1140 of Pub. L. 99–514, as amended, set out as a note under section 401 of Title 26, Internal Revenue Code.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1,244 cases (118 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Torrington Co. v. United States, 146 F. Supp. 2d 845 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Torrington Co. v. United States, 146 F. Supp. 2d 845 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001). · cites it 53× “§ 1677b (1988)), the statute now provides for normal value (“NV”), which is defined as “the price at which the foreign like product is first sold (or, in the absence of a sale, offered for sale) for consumption in the exporting country, in the usual commercial quantities and in…”

NSK Ltd. v. United States, 217 F. Supp. 2d 1291 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002). · cites it 60× “Accord 19 U.S.C. § 1677b (b)(2) (A) (ii). Therefore, Commerce initiated a COP investigation of sales by NTN in the home market.”

Dorbest Ltd. v. United States, 604 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2010). · cites it 19× “” 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(4). The issue is whether Commerce’s valuation method is in accordance with law and supported by substantial evidence.”

NTN Bearing Corp. of Am. v. United States, 186 F. Supp. 2d 1257 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002). · cites it 45× “Commerce responds that 19 U.S.C. § 1677b (1994) provides that: [i]f the foreign like product is sold or, in the absence of sales, offered for sale through an affiliated party, the prices at which the foreign like product is sold (or offered for sale) by such affiliated party may…”

Luoyang Bearing Factory v. United States, 240 F. Supp. 2d 1268 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002). · cites it 36× “The Court can envision a distinction between 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a) and 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(1).”

Timken Co. v. United States, 673 F. Supp. 495 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1987). · cites it 32× “” 19 U.S.C. § 1677b. Specifically, in subsection (aX2) of section 773, the statute provides that in the event foreign market value cannot be determined by price, “the foreign market value of the merchandise may be the constructed value of that merchandise.”

Allied Pac. Food (Dalian) Co. v. United States, 587 F. Supp. 2d 1330 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2008). · cites it 38× “If Commerce determines (as it has generally) that it is unable, using the available information, to determine the normal value of subject merchandise exported from China according to the general provisions of 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a), Commerce, as required by § 1677b(c), “shall…”

Borden, Inc. v. United States, 4 F. Supp. 2d 1221 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998). · cites it 34× “Commerce’s Level of Trade Methodology Commerce makes certain additions and deductions in calculating normal value, 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(6), and export price or constructed export price, 19 U.”

Nsk Ltd. v. United States, 245 F. Supp. 2d 1335 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003). · cites it 50× “” 19 U.S.C. § 1677b (b)(3)(A)-(C) (1994). Section 1677b(f) articulates “special rules” for the calculation of COP and constructed value (“CV”) and permits Commerce to disregard an affiliated party transaction when “the amount representing [the transaction or transfer price] does…”

RHP Bearings, Ltd. v. United States, 83 F. Supp. 2d 1322 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999). · cites it 47× “§ 1677b(a)(l)(B), (C); or (2) CV of the imported merchandise, see 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(4), 3 which is calculated pursuant to 19 U.”

Rhp Bearings Ltd., Nsk Bearings Eur. Ltd., & Nsk Corp. v. United States, & the Torrington Co., 288 F.3d 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2002). · cites it 25× “§ 1677a (1999) 1 , or (ii) the normal value of the bearings, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1677b. RHP Bearings, 120 F.Supp.”

Dorbest Ltd. v. United States, 462 F. Supp. 2d 1262 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2006). · cites it 18× “” 19 U.S.C. § 1677b (c)(1) (emphasis added); see also Globe Metallurgical, Inc.”

Show all 1,244 citing cases →

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(2) — 1 case

Brother Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 540 F. Supp. 1341 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1982).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(2)(A)(ii) — 1 case

Thai Plastic Bags Indus. Co. v. United States, 746 F.3d 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2014).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(2)(B)(i) — 1 case

Agro Dutch Indus. Ltd. v. United States, 2007 CIT 25 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(3) — 2 cases

NTN Bearing Corp. of Am. v. United States, 83 F. Supp. 2d 1281 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

NTN Bearing Corp. v. United States, 1999 CIT 71 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(3)(B) — 1 case

Nagase & Co. v. United States, 2023 CIT 46 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2023).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(4) — 2 cases

Jacobi Carbons AB & Jacobi Carbons, Inc. v. United States, 2017 CIT 39 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017).

Koenig & Bauer-Albert AG v. United States, 15 F. Supp. 2d 834 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(4)(B) — 1 case

Nihon Cement Co. v. United States, 17 Ct. Int'l Trade 400 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1993).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(6)(C) — 1 case

Shandong Huarong Mach. Co. v. United States, 435 F. Supp. 2d 1261 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2006).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(6)(C)(iii) — 1 case

ABB Inc. v. United States, 355 F. Supp. 3d 1206 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(7) — 1 case

ABB Inc. v. United States, 190 F. Supp. 3d 1159 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(7)(A) — 3 cases

Ta Chen Stainless Steel Pipe, Ltd. v. United States, 342 F. Supp. 2d 1191 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

Böwe Passat Reinigungs-Und Wäschereitechnik GmbH v. United States, 926 F. Supp. 1138 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).

Böwe Passat Reinigungs-und Waschereitechnik GmbH v. United States, 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 1426 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(7)(B) — 5 cases

Pakfood Pub. Co. Ltd. v. United States, 724 F. Supp. 2d 1327 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2010).

Dong-A Steel Co. v. United StatesPublic version posted 10/01/2020., 2020 CIT 139 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2020).

Hyundai Steel Co. v. United States, 319 F. Supp. 3d 1327 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

Hyundai Steel Co. v. United States, 2019 CIT 24 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

Lifestyle Enter., Inc. v. United States, 2011 CIT 16 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2011).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(A)(ii) — 1 case

Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Comm. v. United States, 616 F. Supp. 2d 1354 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a) — 218 cases

Qvd Food Co., Ltd. v. United States, 658 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

United States Steel Corp. v. United States, 179 F. Supp. 3d 1114 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

Asociacion Colombiana De Exportadores De Flores v. United States, 704 F. Supp. 1114 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1989).

GPX Int'l Tire Corp. v. United States, 715 F. Supp. 2d 1337 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2010).

Hung Vuong Corp. v. United States, 2020 CIT 174 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2020).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(1) — 33 cases

Timken Co. v. United States, 630 F. Supp. 1327 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1986).

Fed.-Mogul Corp. v. United States, 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 234 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).

Timken Co. v. United States, 673 F. Supp. 495 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1987). “” 19 U.S.C. § 1677b. Specifically, in subsection (aX2) of section 773, the statute provides that in the event foreign market value cannot be determined by price, “the foreign market value of the merchandise may be the constructed value of that merchandise.”

Qvd Food Co., Ltd. v. United States, 658 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

Melamine Chemicals, Inc. v. The United States, 732 F.2d 924 (Fed. Cir. 1984).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(1)(1988) — 1 case

Sanyo Elec. Co., Ltd. v. United States, 9 F. Supp. 2d 688 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(1)(A) — 39 cases

Mantex, Inc. v. United States, 17 Ct. Int'l Trade 1385 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1993).

Rhp Bearings Ltd., Nsk Bearings Eur. Ltd., & Nsk Corp. v. United States, & the Torrington Co., 288 F.3d 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2002). “§ 1677a (1999) 1 , or (ii) the normal value of the bearings, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1677b. RHP Bearings, 120 F.Supp.”

The Ad Hoc Comm. of Az-Nm-Tx-Fl Producers of Gray Portland Cement v. The United States, Cemex S.A., & Apasco, S.A. De C.V., 13 F.3d 398 (Fed. Cir. 1994).

Shenzhen Xinboda Indus. Co. v. United States, 2016 CIT 74 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(1)(B) — 24 cases

Pesquera Mares Australes Ltda. v. United States v. Coalition for Fair Atl. Salmon Trade, 266 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2001).

Eregli Demir Ve Celik Fabrikalari T.A.S v. United States, 308 F. Supp. 3d 1297 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

Jinko Solar Co., Ltd. v. United States, 2017 CIT 62 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017).

Mid Continent Steel & Wire, Inc. v. United States, 219 F. Supp. 3d 1326 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(1)(B)(1) — 1 case

Vicentin S.A.I.C. v. United States, 2019 CIT 120 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(1)(B)(i) — 78 cases

Dillinger France S.A. v. United States, 2018 CIT 150 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

NTN Bearing Corp. of Am. v. United States, 248 F. Supp. 2d 1256 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

Torrington Co. v. United States, 146 F. Supp. 2d 845 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001). “§ 1677b (1988)), the statute now provides for normal value (“NV”), which is defined as “the price at which the foreign like product is first sold (or, in the absence of a sale, offered for sale) for consumption in the exporting country, in the usual commercial quantities and in…”

ABB Inc. v. United States, 355 F. Supp. 3d 1206 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(1)(B)(ii) — 18 cases

Solarworld Americas, Inc. v. United States, 962 F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2020).

Dong-A Steel Co. v. United StatesPublic version posted 10/01/2020., 2020 CIT 139 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2020).

Home Prods. Int'l, Inc. v. United States, 633 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

Jacobi Carbons AB v. United States, 2018 CIT 46 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(1)(C) — 9 cases

Mid Continent Steel & Wire v. United States, 941 F.3d 530 (Fed. Cir. 2019).

Mid Continent Nail Corp. v. United States, 2010 CIT 47 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2010).

Trust Chem Co. Ltd. v. United States, 791 F. Supp. 2d 1257 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2011).

Globe Metallurgical, Inc. v. United States, 781 F. Supp. 2d 1340 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2011).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(1)(C)(i) — 1 case

Cornerstone Chem. Co. v. United States, 2026 CIT 64 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2026).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(1)(C)(ii) — 2 cases

Stupp Corp. v. United States, 2019 CIT 134 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

Giorgio Foods, Inc. v. United States, 2025 CIT 90 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2025).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(1)(C)(iii) — 7 cases

Hyundai Steel Co. v. United States, 19 F.4th 1346 (Fed. Cir. 2021).

Dong-A Steel Co. v. United StatesPublic version posted 10/01/2020., 2020 CIT 139 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2020).

NEXTEEL Co. v. United States, 355 F. Supp. 3d 1336 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 97 F. Supp. 2d 1203 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2000).

Hyundai Steel Co. v. United States (Fed. Cir. 2021).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(1)(b)(i) — 1 case

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(1)(c) — 1 case

Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Comm. v. United States, 616 F. Supp. 2d 1354 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(1994) — 1 case

Baoding Yude Chem. Indus. Co. v. United States, 170 F. Supp. 2d 1335 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(2) — 45 cases

Alhambra Foundry Co., Ltd. v. United States, 685 F. Supp. 1252 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1988).

AK Steel Corp. v. United States, 21 Ct. Int'l Trade 1265 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1997).

Zenith Elec. Corp. v. United States, 633 F. Supp. 1382 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1986).

Maverick Tube Corp. v. United States, 2015 CIT 107 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2015).

Böwe Passat Reinigungs-Und Wäschereitechnik GmbH v. United States, 926 F. Supp. 1138 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(3) — 17 cases

NSK Ltd. v. United States, 217 F. Supp. 2d 1291 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002). “Accord 19 U.S.C. § 1677b (b)(2) (A) (ii). Therefore, Commerce initiated a COP investigation of sales by NTN in the home market.”

NTN Bearing Corp. of Am. v. United States, 186 F. Supp. 2d 1257 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002). “Commerce responds that 19 U.S.C. § 1677b (1994) provides that: [i]f the foreign like product is sold or, in the absence of sales, offered for sale through an affiliated party, the prices at which the foreign like product is sold (or offered for sale) by such affiliated party may…”

Nec Home Elec., Ltd. & Nec Tech., Inc. v. The United States, & Zenith Elec. Corp., 54 F.3d 736 (Fed. Cir. 1995).

Sugiyama Chain Co. v. United States, 18 Ct. Int'l Trade 423 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1994).

Yamaha Motor Co. v. United States, 19 Ct. Int'l Trade 1349 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(3)(1988) — 2 cases

Sanyo Elec. Co., Ltd. v. United States, 86 F. Supp. 2d 1232 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

Sanyo Elec. Co., Ltd. v. United States, 9 F. Supp. 2d 688 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(4) — 120 cases

Brother Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 540 F. Supp. 1341 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1982).

U.H.F.C. Co. v. United States, 916 F.2d 689 (Fed. Cir. 1990).

Rhone Poulenc, S.A. v. United States, 592 F. Supp. 1318 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1984).

Hussey Copper, Ltd. v. United States, 17 Ct. Int'l Trade 993 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1993).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(4)(1988) — 1 case

Sugiyama Chain Co. v. United States, 19 Ct. Int'l Trade 328 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(4)(A) — 5 cases

Mantex, Inc. v. United States, 17 Ct. Int'l Trade 1385 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1993).

Silver Reed Am., Inc. v. United States, 581 F. Supp. 1290 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1984).

Sandvik AB v. United States, 721 F. Supp. 1322 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1989).

Silver Reed Am., Inc. v. United States, 679 F. Supp. 12 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1988).

Indep. Radionic Workers of Am. v. United States, 862 F. Supp. 422 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1994).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(4)(B) — 107 cases

Fed.-Mogul Corp. v. United States, 17 Ct. Int'l Trade 88 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1993).

Consum. Prods. Div., Scm Corp., the United States, Party-In-Interest v. Silver Reed Am., Inc. & Silver Seiko, Ltd., 753 F.2d 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1985).

Torrington Co. v. United States, 17 Ct. Int'l Trade 199 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1993).

Zenith Elec. Corp. v. United States, 633 F. Supp. 1382 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1986).

NSK Ltd. v. United States, 21 Ct. Int'l Trade 617 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1997).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(4)(B)(1988) — 1 case

Sanyo Elec. Co., Ltd. v. United States, 9 F. Supp. 2d 688 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(4)(C) — 15 cases

Alhambra Foundry Co., Ltd. v. United States, 685 F. Supp. 1252 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1988).

Daewoo Elec. Co., Ltd. v. United States, 712 F. Supp. 931 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1989).

Ad Hoc Comm. of S. California Producers of Gray Portland Cement v. United States, 914 F. Supp. 535 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).

Zenith Elec. Corp. v. United States, 755 F. Supp. 397 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1990).

Cemex, S.A. v. United States, 133 F.3d 897 (Fed. Cir. 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(4)(c) — 1 case

Cemex, S.A. v. United States, 133 F.3d 897 (Fed. Cir. 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(4KB) — 1 case

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(5) — 6 cases

NTN Bearing Corp. of Am. v. United States, 248 F. Supp. 2d 1256 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

Ferro Union, Inc. v. United States, 44 F. Supp. 2d 1310 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

Ntn Corp. v. United States, 306 F. Supp. 2d 1319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

Nsk Ltd. v. United States, 245 F. Supp. 2d 1335 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003). “” 19 U.S.C. § 1677b (b)(3)(A)-(C) (1994). Section 1677b(f) articulates “special rules” for the calculation of COP and constructed value (“CV”) and permits Commerce to disregard an affiliated party transaction when “the amount representing [the transaction or transfer price] does…”

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(5)(1994) — 1 case

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(6) — 13 cases

Borden, Inc. v. United States, 4 F. Supp. 2d 1221 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998). “Commerce’s Level of Trade Methodology Commerce makes certain additions and deductions in calculating normal value, 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(6), and export price or constructed export price, 19 U.”

Ntn Corp. v. United States, 306 F. Supp. 2d 1319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

Apex Exports v. United States, 777 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2015).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(6)(A) — 1 case

Ntn Corp. v. United States, 306 F. Supp. 2d 1319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(6)(B)(i) — 1 case

Ntn Corp. v. United States, 306 F. Supp. 2d 1319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(6)(B)(ii) — 7 cases

Dongguan Sunrise Furniture Co., Ltd. v. United States, 2012 CIT 79 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2012).

NEXTEEL Co. v. United States, 355 F. Supp. 3d 1336 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. v. United States, 2020 CIT 4 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2020).

Ntn Corp. v. United States, 306 F. Supp. 2d 1319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

CC Metals & Alloys, LLC v. United States, 2016 CIT 3 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(6)(B)(iii) — 7 cases

Guizhou Tyre Co. v. United States, 2019 CIT 64 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

Qingdao Qihang Tyre Co., Ltd. v. United States, 2018 CIT 35 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

Jacobi Carbons AB v. United States, 2019 CIT 28 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

Jacobi Carbons AB v. United States, 2019 CIT 27 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo & Wood Indus. Co. v. United States, 2020 CIT 31 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2020).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(6)(C) — 17 cases

Pesquera Mares Australes Ltda. v. United States v. Coalition for Fair Atl. Salmon Trade, 266 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2001).

Abb, Inc. v. United States, 920 F.3d 811 (Fed. Cir. 2019).

Viraj Forgings, Ltd. v. United States, 283 F. Supp. 2d 1335 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 15 F. Supp. 2d 807 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(6)(C)(ii) — 20 cases

Pesquera Mares Australes Ltda. v. United States v. Coalition for Fair Atl. Salmon Trade, 266 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2001).

Bohler Bleche GMBH & Co. KG v. United States, 324 F. Supp. 3d 1344 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 54 F. Supp. 2d 1183 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

Fagersta Stainless AB v. United States, 577 F. Supp. 2d 1270 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2008).

Mid Continent Nail Corp. v. United States, 2010 CIT 47 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2010).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(6)(C)(iii) — 30 cases

Abb, Inc. v. United States, 920 F.3d 811 (Fed. Cir. 2019).

ABB Inc. v. United States, 355 F. Supp. 3d 1206 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

ABB, Inc. v. United States, 2017 CIT 137 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(6)(c) — 1 case

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 15 F. Supp. 2d 807 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(6)(e)(ii) — 1 case

Thai Plastic Bags Indus. Co. v. United States, 746 F.3d 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2014).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(7) — 16 cases

FAG Kugelfischer Georg Schafer AG v. United States, 131 F. Supp. 2d 104 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

Timken Co. v. United States, 240 F. Supp. 2d 1228 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(7)(A) — 36 cases

Pakfood Pub. Co. Ltd. v. United States, 724 F. Supp. 2d 1327 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2010).

NTN Bearing Corp. of Am. v. United States, 104 F. Supp. 2d 110 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2000).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(7)(A)(i) — 4 cases

Pakfood Pub. Co. Ltd. v. United States, 724 F. Supp. 2d 1327 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2010).

Hornos Electricos De Venezuela, S.A. v. United States, 285 F. Supp. 2d 1353 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. United States, 27 F. Supp. 2d 201 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(7)(A)(ii) — 6 cases

Pakfood Pub. Co. Ltd. v. United States, 724 F. Supp. 2d 1327 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2010).

Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd. v. United States, 8 F. Supp. 2d 862 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

Hoogovens Staal BV v. United States, 138 F. Supp. 2d 1352 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

Arcelormittal USA Inc. v. United States, 2008 CIT 52 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2008).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(7)(B) — 40 cases

Pakfood Pub. Co. Ltd. v. United States, 724 F. Supp. 2d 1327 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2010).

Ta Chen Stainless Steel Pipe, Ltd. v. United States, 342 F. Supp. 2d 1191 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

Nsk Ltd. v. United States, 170 F. Supp. 2d 1280 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(7)(ii) — 1 case

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(8) — 4 cases

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 54 F. Supp. 2d 1183 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 15 F. Supp. 2d 807 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

Vicentin S.A.I.C. v. United States, 2019 CIT 120 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

Agro Dutch Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 2006 CIT 40 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2006).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(B) — 1 case

FAG Italia S.P.A. v. United States, 2003 CIT 12 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(B)(ii)(II) — 1 case

Maverick Tube Corp. v. United States, 2015 CIT 107 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2015).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(b) — 1 case

Thai Plastic Bags Indus. Co. v. United States, 752 F. Supp. 2d 1316 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2010).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(e)(2) — 1 case

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(l) — 89 cases

SKF USA Inc. v. United States, 263 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2001).

PQ Corp. v. United States, 652 F. Supp. 724 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1987).

Torrington Co. v. United States, 19 Ct. Int'l Trade 403 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).

Qvd Food Co., Ltd. v. United States, 658 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(l)(1994) — 1 case

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 97 F. Supp. 2d 1203 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2000).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(l)(6) — 1 case

Jtekt Corp. v. United States, 675 F. Supp. 2d 1206 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(l)(A) — 78 cases

Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd. v. United States, 186 F. Supp. 2d 1332 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002).

NTN Bearing Corp. of Am. v. United States, 19 Ct. Int'l Trade 1221 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).

Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd. v. United States, 516 F. Supp. 2d 1323 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).

Zenith Elec. Corp. v. United States, 633 F. Supp. 1382 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1986).

Alhambra Foundry Co., Ltd. v. United States, 685 F. Supp. 1252 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1988).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(l)(B) — 68 cases

Cs Wind Vietnam Co., Ltd. v. United States, 832 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2016).

Corus Staal BV v. United States, 502 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2007).

Monsanto Co. v. United States, 698 F. Supp. 275 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1988).

Skf USA, Inc. v. United States, 537 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2008).

Zenith Elec. Corp. v. United States, 633 F. Supp. 1382 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1986).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(l)(B)(I) — 1 case

Shandong Huarong Mach. Co. v. United States, 2005 CIT 54 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2005).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(l)(B)(i) — 75 cases

Shakeproof Assembly Components, Div. of Illinois Tool Works, Inc. v. United States, 268 F.3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2001).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(l)(B)(ii) — 18 cases

Atar, S.R.L. v. United States, 637 F. Supp. 2d 1068 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

Pesquera Mares Australes Ltda. v. United States v. Coalition for Fair Atl. Salmon Trade, 266 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2001).

Husteel Co., Ltd. v. United States, 491 F. Supp. 2d 1283 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).

Davis Wire Corp. v. United States, 2016 CIT 63 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(l)(C) — 19 cases

Alloy Piping Prods., Inc. v. United States, 201 F. Supp. 2d 1267 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002).

Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Comm. v. United States, 616 F. Supp. 2d 1354 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

Apex Frozen Foods Private Ltd. v. United States, 2016 CIT 9 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

Thai I-Mei Frozen Foods Co., Ltd. v. United States, 572 F. Supp. 2d 1353 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2008).

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 15 F. Supp. 2d 807 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(l)(C)(i) — 1 case

Alloy Piping Prods., Inc. v. United States, 201 F. Supp. 2d 1267 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(l)(C)(ii) — 5 cases

Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Comm. v. United States, 616 F. Supp. 2d 1354 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

Chemetals, Inc. v. United States, 138 F. Supp. 2d 1338 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

Husteel Co., Ltd. v. United States, 491 F. Supp. 2d 1283 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).

Nsk Ltd. v. United States, 277 F. Supp. 2d 1332 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

Itochu Bldg. Prods., Co. v. United States, 208 F. Supp. 3d 1377 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(l)(C)(iii) — 2 cases

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 97 F. Supp. 2d 1203 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2000).

Chemetals, Inc. v. United States, 138 F. Supp. 2d 1338 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(l)(c) — 1 case

Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Comm. v. United States, 616 F. Supp. 2d 1354 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(l)(e) — 1 case

Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Comm. v. United States, 616 F. Supp. 2d 1354 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(lXB)(i) — 1 case

Searing Indus. v. United States, 662 F. Supp. 2d 1327 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(lXB)(i)(2000) — 1 case

Allied Tube & Conduit Corp. v. United States, 31 Ct. Int'l Trade 1090 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(aX2) — 1 case

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b) — 126 cases

Fujitsu Gen. Ltd. v. United States, 88 F.3d 1034 (Fed. Cir. 1996).

Fed.-Mogul Corp. v. United States, 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 234 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).

Nsk Ltd. & Nsk Corp. v. The United States, & Fed.-Mogul Corp., & the Torrington Co., 115 F.3d 965 (Fed. Cir. 1997).

Primary Steel, Inc. v. United States, 17 Ct. Int'l Trade 1080 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1993).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(1) — 40 cases

NTN Bearing Corp. of Am. v. United States, 248 F. Supp. 2d 1256 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

Nsk Ltd. v. United States, 346 F. Supp. 2d 1312 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

Hangzhou Spring Washer Co., Ltd. v. United States, 387 F. Supp. 2d 1236 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2005).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(1)(2) — 1 case

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(1)(A) — 1 case

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 15 F. Supp. 2d 807 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(1)(B) — 3 cases

SeAH Steel Corp. v. United States, 2013 CIT 124 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2013).

Dongbu Steel Co. v. United States, 2015 CIT 43 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2015).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(1994) — 1 case

U.S. Steel Grp. v. United States, 22 Ct. Int'l Trade 104 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(2) — 6 cases

Daewoo Elec. Co., Ltd. v. United States, 712 F. Supp. 931 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1989).

SeAH Steel Corp. v. United States, 764 F. Supp. 2d 1322 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2011).

Nachi-Fujikoshi Corp. v. United States, 798 F. Supp. 716 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1992).

Union Steel Mfg. Co. v. United States, 2012 CIT 67 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2012).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(2)(A) — 4 cases

FAG Italia S.P.A. v. United States, 110 F. Supp. 2d 1055 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2000).

RHP Bearings Ltd. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1097 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

Fag Italia S.P.A. v. United States, 110 F. Supp. 2d 1055 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2000).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(2)(A)(i) — 6 cases

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 15 F. Supp. 2d 807 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

FAG Italia S.P.A. v. United States, 110 F. Supp. 2d 1055 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2000).

Nsk Ltd. v. United States, 277 F. Supp. 2d 1332 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

Fag Italia S.P.A. v. United States, 110 F. Supp. 2d 1055 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2000).

FAG Italia S.P.A. v. United States, 2003 CIT 12 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(2)(A)(ii) — 9 cases

Ntn Corp. v. United States, 306 F. Supp. 2d 1319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

NTN Bearing Corp. of Am. v. United States, 248 F. Supp. 2d 1256 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(2)(B) — 3 cases

Hyundai Elec. Co., Ltd. v. United States, 53 F. Supp. 2d 1334 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

Prodotti Alimentari Meridionali, S.R.L. v. United States, 2002 CIT 68 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002).

Dongbu Steel Co. v. United States, 2015 CIT 43 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2015).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(2)(C) — 2 cases

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 15 F. Supp. 2d 807 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

Viraj Forgings, Ltd. v. United States, 283 F. Supp. 2d 1335 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(2)(C)(I) — 1 case

Nsk Ltd. v. United States, 346 F. Supp. 2d 1312 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(2)(C)(i) — 1 case

Dongbu Steel Co. v. United States, 2015 CIT 43 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2015).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(2)(D) — 8 cases

SeAH Steel Corp. v. United States, 764 F. Supp. 2d 1322 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2011).

Seah Steel Corp. v. United States, 704 F. Supp. 2d 1353 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2010).

Acciai Speciali Terni S.P.A. v. United States, 142 F. Supp. 2d 969 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 15 F. Supp. 2d 807 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

Union Steel Mfg. Co. v. United States, 2014 CIT 27 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2014).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(3) — 38 cases

Mueller Comercial De Mexico, S. De R.L. De C v. v. United States, 753 F.3d 1227 (Fed. Cir. 2014).

Saha Thai Steel Pipe (Pub.) Co. Ltd. v. United States, 635 F.3d 1335 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

Eregli Demir Ve Celik Fabrikalari T.A.S v. United States, 308 F. Supp. 3d 1297 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

Dillinger France S.A. v. United States, 2018 CIT 150 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

Hyundai Steel Co. v. United States, 19 F.4th 1346 (Fed. Cir. 2021).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(3)(A) — 16 cases

Viraj Grp., Ltd. v. United States, 162 F. Supp. 2d 656 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

Ntn Corp. v. United States, 306 F. Supp. 2d 1319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(3)(B) — 10 cases

Union Steel Mfg. Co. v. United States, 2012 CIT 67 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2012).

Pakfood Pub. Co. Ltd. v. United States, 724 F. Supp. 2d 1327 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2010).

Thai Plastic Bags Indus., Co., Ltd. v. United States, 2013 CIT 139 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2013).

Thai Plastic Bags Indus. Co. v. United States, 904 F. Supp. 2d 1326 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2013).

Am. Silicon Tech. v. United States, 334 F.3d 1033 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(3)(b) — 1 case

Corus Eng'g Steels Ltd. v. United States, 2003 CIT 110 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(A) — 1 case

Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. v. United States, 2020 CIT 4 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2020).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(e) — 2 cases

Union Steel Mfg. Co. v. United States, 2016 CIT 117 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

Saha Thai Steel Pipe Pub. Co. Ltd. v. United States, 2019 CIT 165 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(f)(2) — 1 case

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(l) — 57 cases

Ntn Corp. v. United States, 306 F. Supp. 2d 1319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 15 F. Supp. 2d 807 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

Acciai Speciali Terni S.P.A. v. United States, 142 F. Supp. 2d 969 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(l)(1988) — 1 case

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 15 F. Supp. 2d 807 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(l)(1994) — 2 cases

Koenig & Bauer-Albert AG v. United States, 90 F. Supp. 2d 1284 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2000).

Heveafil Sdn. Bhd. v. United States, 2001 CIT 22 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(l)(A) — 3 cases

Seah Steel Corp. v. United States, 704 F. Supp. 2d 1353 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2010).

SeAH Steel Corp. v. United States, 2013 CIT 124 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2013).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(b)(l)(B) — 4 cases

SeAH Steel Corp. v. United States, 764 F. Supp. 2d 1322 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2011).

Agro Dutch Foods Ltd. v. United States, 110 F. Supp. 2d 950 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2000).

Prodotti Alimentari Meridionali, S.R.L. v. United States, 2002 CIT 68 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002).

Dongbu Steel Co. v. United States, 2015 CIT 43 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2015).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c) — 180 cases

Shandong Huarong Gen. Corp. v. United States, 159 F. Supp. 2d 714 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

Cs Wind Vietnam Co., Ltd. v. United States, 832 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2016).

Shakeproof Assembly Components, Div. of Illinois Tool Works, Inc. v. United States, 268 F.3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2001).

China Kingdom Imp. & Exp. Co. v. United States, 507 F. Supp. 2d 1337 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).

Qingdao Qihang Tyre Co., Ltd. v. United States, 2018 CIT 35 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(1) — 162 cases

Luoyang Bearing Factory v. United States, 240 F. Supp. 2d 1268 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002). “The Court can envision a distinction between 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a) and 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(1).”

Qingdao Qihang Tyre Co., Ltd. v. United States, 2018 CIT 35 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

Goldlink Indus. Co., Ltd. v. United States, 431 F. Supp. 2d 1323 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2006).

Dorbest Ltd. v. United States, 462 F. Supp. 2d 1262 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2006). “” 19 U.S.C. § 1677b (c)(1) (emphasis added); see also Globe Metallurgical, Inc.”

Allied Pac. Food (Dalian) Co. Ltd. v. United States, 435 F. Supp. 2d 1295 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2006).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(1)(A) — 3 cases

Soc Trang Seafood Jt. Stock Co. v. United States, 2018 CIT 75 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

Soc Trang Seafood Jt. Stock Co. v. United States, 2019 CIT 23 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

GPX Int'l Tire Corp. v. United States, 2009 CIT 103 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(1)(B) — 49 cases

Jacobi Carbons AB & Jacobi Carbons, Inc. v. United States, 2017 CIT 39 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017).

Solarworld Americas, Inc. v. United States, Yingli Green Energy Holding Co., 910 F.3d 1216 (Fed. Cir. 2018).

Zhengzhou Harmoni Spice Co., Ltd. v. United States, 617 F. Supp. 2d 1281 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

Thuan an Prod. Trading & Serv. Co., Ltd. v. United States, 2018 CIT 152 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

Diamond Sawblades Mfrs.' Coalition v. United States, 219 F. Supp. 3d 1368 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(1)(B)(2) — 1 case

SeAH Steel VINA Corp. v. United States, 2018 CIT 98 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(1988) — 2 cases

Rhodia, Inc. v. United States, 185 F. Supp. 2d 1343 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

Baoding Yude Chem. Indus. Co. v. United States, 170 F. Supp. 2d 1335 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(1994) — 2 cases

Rhodia, Inc. v. United States, 185 F. Supp. 2d 1343 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

Baoding Yude Chem. Indus. Co. v. United States, 170 F. Supp. 2d 1335 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(2) — 29 cases

Zhengzhou Harmoni Spice Co., Ltd. v. United States, 617 F. Supp. 2d 1281 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

Nan Ya Plastics Corp. v. United States, 810 F.3d 1333 (Fed. Cir. 2016).

Chem. Prods. Corp. v. United States, 645 F. Supp. 289 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1986).

Writing Instrument Mfrs. Ass'n v. U.S. Dep't of Com., 21 Ct. Int'l Trade 1185 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1997).

Ningbo Dafa Chem. Fiber Co., Ltd. v. United States, 580 F.3d 1247 (Fed. Cir. 2009).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(2)(A) — 1 case

NTSF Seafoods Jt. Stock Co. v. United States, 2020 CIT 180 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2020).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(2)(B) — 2 cases

Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. v. United States, 2014 CIT 12 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2014).

Clearon Corp. v. United States, 2014 CIT 88 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2014).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(2)(B)(iii) — 1 case

Husteel Co. v. United States, 2016 CIT 76 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(2)(b) — 1 case

Juancheng Kangtai Chem. Co. v. United States, 2017 CIT 3 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(2000) — 1 case

Pac. Giant, Inc. v. United States, 223 F. Supp. 2d 1336 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(3) — 70 cases

Taian Ziyang Food Co., Ltd. v. United States, 637 F. Supp. 2d 1093 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

Rhodia, Inc. v. United States, 185 F. Supp. 2d 1343 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

Luoyang Bearing Factory v. United States, 240 F. Supp. 2d 1268 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002). “The Court can envision a distinction between 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a) and 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(1).”

Zhejiang Dunan Hetian Metal Co., Ltd. v. United States, 652 F.3d 1333 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

Zhengzhou Harmoni Spice Co., Ltd. v. United States, 617 F. Supp. 2d 1281 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(3)(A) — 7 cases

Elkay Mfg. Co. v. United States, 2016 CIT 69 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

Elkay Mfg. Co. v. United States, 2014 CIT 150 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2014).

Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co. v. United States, 2019 CIT 55 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

Jiangsu Zhongji Lamination Materials Co. v. United States, 2019 CIT 111 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

Bio-Lab, Inc. v. United States, 392 F. Supp. 3d 1264 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(3)(B) — 5 cases

Allied Pac. Food (Dalian) Co. Ltd. v. United States, 435 F. Supp. 2d 1295 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2006).

Zhengzhou Harmoni Spice Co., Ltd. v. United States, 617 F. Supp. 2d 1281 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

DuPont Teijin Films China Ltd. v. United States, 2014 CIT 106 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2014).

Linyi Chengen Imp. & Exp. Co. v. United States, 2020 CIT 183 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2020).

Jining Yongjia Trade Co. v. United States, 2010 CIT 134 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2010).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(3)(C) — 1 case

Raoping Xingyu Foods Co. v. United States, 2004 CIT 111 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(3)(D) — 1 case

Sinopec Sichuan Vinylon Works v. United States, 2006 CIT 78 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2006).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(4) — 155 cases

Allied Pac. Food (Dalian) Co. v. United States, 587 F. Supp. 2d 1330 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2008). “If Commerce determines (as it has generally) that it is unable, using the available information, to determine the normal value of subject merchandise exported from China according to the general provisions of 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a), Commerce, as required by § 1677b(c), “shall…”

Dorbest Ltd. v. United States, 604 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2010). “” 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(4). The issue is whether Commerce’s valuation method is in accordance with law and supported by substantial evidence.”

Luoyang Bearing Factory v. United States, 240 F. Supp. 2d 1268 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002). “The Court can envision a distinction between 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a) and 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(1).”

Shandong Rongxin Imp. & Exp. Co. v. United States, 774 F. Supp. 2d 1307 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2011).

Shandong Huarong Gen. Corp. v. United States, 159 F. Supp. 2d 714 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(4)(1999) — 1 case

Citic Trading Co. v. United States, 2003 CIT 23 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(4)(A) — 51 cases

Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. v. United States, 2014 CIT 12 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2014).

Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co. v. United States, 822 F.3d 1289 (Fed. Cir. 2016).

Downhole Pipe & Equip., L.P. v. United States, 776 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2015).

Tri Union Frozen Prods., Inc. v. United States, 163 F. Supp. 3d 1255 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(4)(B) — 21 cases

Tri Union Frozen Prods., Inc. v. United States, 163 F. Supp. 3d 1255 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

Dongguan Sunrise Furniture Co., Ltd. v. United States, 2012 CIT 79 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2012).

Allied Pac. Food (Dalian) Co. Ltd. v. United States, 435 F. Supp. 2d 1295 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2006).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(4)(l) — 1 case

Timken Co. v. United States, 166 F. Supp. 2d 608 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(5) — 6 cases

Cs Wind Vietnam Co., Ltd. v. United States, 832 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2016).

Mid Continent Steel & Wire v. United States, 941 F.3d 530 (Fed. Cir. 2019).

Weishan Hongda Aquatic Food Co., Ltd. v. United States, 2017 CIT 145 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017).

YC Rubber Co. (North Am.) LLC v. United States, 2020 CIT 189 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2020).

T. T. Int'l Co. v. United States, 2020 CIT 63 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2020).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(5)(2015) — 2 cases

Jacobi Carbons AB v. United States, 2018 CIT 46 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

Jacobi Carbons AB v. United States, 2018 CIT 47 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(I) — 1 case

Shieldalloy Metallurgical Corp. v. United States, 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 1362 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(i) — 1 case

Peer Bearing Co.—Changshan v. United States, 2015 CIT 142 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2015).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(i)(B) — 1 case

Changshan Peer Bearing Co. v. United States, 2015 CIT 10 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2015).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(l) — 193 cases

Timken Co. v. United States, 166 F. Supp. 2d 608 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

Tri Union Frozen Prods., Inc. v. United States, 163 F. Supp. 3d 1255 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

Cs Wind Vietnam Co., Ltd. v. United States, 832 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2016).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(l)(1988) — 1 case

Shieldalloy Metallurgical Corp. v. United States, 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 1362 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(l)(1994) — 1 case

Air Prods. & Chemicals, Inc. v. United States, 14 F. Supp. 2d 737 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(l)(B) — 43 cases

Hebei Metals & Minerals Imp. & Exp. Corp. v. United States, 366 F. Supp. 2d 1264 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2005).

Dongguan Sunrise Furniture Co., Ltd. v. United States, 2012 CIT 79 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2012).

Seah Steel Vina Corp. v. United States, 182 F. Supp. 3d 1316 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

Taian Ziyang Food Co., Ltd. v. United States, 637 F. Supp. 2d 1093 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co. v. United States, 822 F.3d 1289 (Fed. Cir. 2016).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c)(l)(b)(ii) — 1 case

Chem. Prods. Corp. v. United States, 11 Ct. Int'l Trade 22 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1987).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(d) — 6 cases

Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Comm. v. United States, 616 F. Supp. 2d 1354 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

Kerr-McGee Chem. Corp. v. United States, 741 F. Supp. 947 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1990).

Auto Telecom Co., Ltd. v. United States, 765 F. Supp. 1094 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1991).

Techsnabexport, Ltd. v. United States, 802 F. Supp. 469 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1992).

Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coal. v. United States, 2013 CIT 130 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2013).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(d)(2) — 1 case

Kerr-McGee Chem. Corp. v. United States, 741 F. Supp. 947 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1990).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(d)(2)(A) — 1 case

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(d)(3)(A) — 1 case

Corinth Pipeworks Pipe Indus. SA v. United States, 2023 CIT 65 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2023).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e) — 143 cases

Hercules, Inc. v. United States, 673 F. Supp. 454 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1987).

Dong-A Steel Co. v. United StatesPublic version posted 10/01/2020., 2020 CIT 139 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2020).

Timken Co. v. United States, 18 Ct. Int'l Trade 1 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1994).

Elkem Metals Co. v. United States, 350 F. Supp. 2d 1270 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(1) — 33 cases

Dorbest Ltd. v. United States, 462 F. Supp. 2d 1262 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2006). “” 19 U.S.C. § 1677b (c)(1) (emphasis added); see also Globe Metallurgical, Inc.”

FAG U.K. Ltd. v. United States, 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 1277 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).

Jacobi Carbons AB & Jacobi Carbons, Inc. v. United States, 2017 CIT 39 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017).

Mid Continent Steel & Wire v. United States, 941 F.3d 530 (Fed. Cir. 2019).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(1)(A) — 5 cases

Ipsco, Inc. v. United States, 687 F. Supp. 633 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1988).

E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. United States, 17 Ct. Int'l Trade 1266 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1993).

Avesta Sheffield, Inc. v. United States, 17 Ct. Int'l Trade 1212 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1993).

Alhambra Foundry Co., Ltd. v. United States, 701 F. Supp. 221 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1988).

Ipsco, Inc. v. United States, 749 F. Supp. 1147 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1990).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(1)(B) — 9 cases

Calgon Carbon Corp. v. United States, 2016 CIT 4 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

Hercules, Inc. v. United States, 673 F. Supp. 454 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1987).

Fed.-Mogul Corp. v. United States, 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 234 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).

Rhone-Poulenc, Inc. v. United States, 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 573 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).

Timken Co. v. United States, 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 645 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(1)(B)(ii) — 6 cases

Chem. Prods. Corp. v. United States, 645 F. Supp. 289 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1986).

FAG Kugelfischer Georg Schafer KGaA v. United States, 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 824 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).

Fed.-Mogul Corp. v. United States, 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 520 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).

Skf USA Inc. v. United States, 885 F. Supp. 274 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).

Floral Trade Council v. United States, 1999 CIT 10 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(1982) — 1 case

Timken Co. v. United States, 14 Ct. Int'l Trade 753 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1990).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(1994) — 1 case

Air Prods. & Chemicals, Inc. v. United States, 14 F. Supp. 2d 737 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(2) — 42 cases

NSK Ltd. v. United States, 21 Ct. Int'l Trade 617 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1997).

Nsk Ltd. v. United States, 910 F. Supp. 663 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).

Queen's Flowers de Colombia v. United States, 21 Ct. Int'l Trade 968 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1997).

INA Walzlager Schaeffler KG v. United States, 21 Ct. Int'l Trade 110 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1997).

Aramide Maatschappij V.o.F. v. United States, 19 Ct. Int'l Trade 1094 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(2)(1994) — 1 case

Floral Trade Council v. United States, 41 F. Supp. 2d 319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(2)(A) — 78 cases

RHP Bearings, Ltd. v. United States, 83 F. Supp. 2d 1322 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999). “§ 1677b(a)(l)(B), (C); or (2) CV of the imported merchandise, see 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(4), 3 which is calculated pursuant to 19 U.”

Thai I-Mei Frozen Foods Co., Ltd. v. United States, 572 F. Supp. 2d 1353 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2008).

Nsk Ltd. v. United States, 170 F. Supp. 2d 1280 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

SKF USA Inc. v. United States, 263 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2001).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(2)(A)(1994) — 1 case

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 54 F. Supp. 2d 1183 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(2)(A)(i) — 1 case

SKF USA Inc. v. United States, 2002 CIT 129 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(2)(B) — 39 cases

Thai I-Mei Frozen Foods Co., Ltd v. United States, 477 F. Supp. 2d 1332 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).

Thai I-Mei Frozen Foods Co., Ltd. v. United States, 572 F. Supp. 2d 1353 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2008).

Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Comm. v. United States, 616 F. Supp. 2d 1354 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

Floral Trade Council v. United States, 41 F. Supp. 2d 319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(2)(B)(i) — 25 cases

Thai I-Mei Frozen Foods Co., Ltd. v. United States, 616 F.3d 1300 (Fed. Cir. 2010).

Thai I-Mei Frozen Foods Co., Ltd. v. United States, 572 F. Supp. 2d 1353 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2008).

Thai I-Mei Frozen Foods Co., Ltd v. United States, 477 F. Supp. 2d 1332 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).

Mid Continent Steel & Wire v. United States, 941 F.3d 530 (Fed. Cir. 2019).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(2)(B)(ii) — 11 cases

Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Comm. v. United States, 616 F. Supp. 2d 1354 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

Thai I-Mei Frozen Foods Co., Ltd. v. United States, 616 F.3d 1300 (Fed. Cir. 2010).

Thai I-Mei Frozen Foods Co., Ltd. v. United States, 572 F. Supp. 2d 1353 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2008).

Atar S.R.L. v. United States, 730 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

Floral Trade Council v. United States, 41 F. Supp. 2d 319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(2)(B)(iii) — 38 cases

Floral Trade Council v. United States, 41 F. Supp. 2d 319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

Thai I-Mei Frozen Foods Co., Ltd. v. United States, 616 F.3d 1300 (Fed. Cir. 2010).

Thai I-Mei Frozen Foods Co., Ltd v. United States, 477 F. Supp. 2d 1332 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).

Mid Continent Steel & Wire v. United States, 941 F.3d 530 (Fed. Cir. 2019).

Atar, S.R.L. v. United States, 703 F. Supp. 2d 1359 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2010).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(2)(b) — 1 case

Thai I-Mei Frozen Foods Co., Ltd. v. United States, 572 F. Supp. 2d 1353 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2008).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(2)(ii) — 1 case

Agro Dutch Indus. Ltd. v. United States, 2007 CIT 25 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(2)(iii) — 1 case

Agro Dutch Indus. Ltd. v. United States, 2007 CIT 25 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(3) — 21 cases

Fed.-Mogul Corp. v. United States, 862 F. Supp. 384 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1994).

Torrington Co. v. United States, 19 Ct. Int'l Trade 403 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).

Nsk Ltd. v. United States, 910 F. Supp. 663 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).

Dong-A Steel Co. v. United StatesPublic version posted 10/01/2020., 2020 CIT 139 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2020).

Jinan Yipin Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 526 F. Supp. 2d 1347 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(3)(1) — 1 case

Mid Continent Steel & Wire, Inc. v. United States, 219 F. Supp. 3d 1326 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(3)(B) — 1 case

Allied Pac. Food (Dalian) Co. Ltd. v. United States, 435 F. Supp. 2d 1295 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2006).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(3)(E) — 2 cases

LMI—La Metalli Industriale, S.P.A. v. United States, 712 F. Supp. 959 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1989).

Bomont Indus. v. United States, 718 F. Supp. 958 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1989).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(3)(l) — 1 case

Mid Continent Steel & Wire, Inc. v. United States, 273 F. Supp. 3d 1161 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(4) — 20 cases

Zhejiang Dunan Hetian Metal Co., Ltd. v. United States, 652 F.3d 1333 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

Queen's Flowers de Colombia v. United States, 21 Ct. Int'l Trade 968 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1997).

Shandong Huarong Mach. Co. v. United States, 435 F. Supp. 2d 1261 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2006).

Amanda Foods (Vietnam) Ltd. v. United States, 647 F. Supp. 2d 1368 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(4)(1988) — 1 case

Ferro Union, Inc. v. United States, 44 F. Supp. 2d 1310 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(4)(F) — 1 case

Micron Tech., Inc. v. United States, 19 Ct. Int'l Trade 829 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(B)(i) — 2 cases

Nexteel Co. v. United States, 392 F. Supp. 3d 1276 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

NEXTEEL Co. v. United States, 355 F. Supp. 3d 1336 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(a) — 1 case

Hyundai Steel Co. v. United States, 2023 CIT 183 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2023).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(e) — 1 case

Chem. Prods. Corp. v. United States, 650 F. Supp. 178 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1986).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(l) — 62 cases

Psc Vsmpo-Avismo Corp. v. United States, 688 F.3d 751 (Fed. Cir. 2012).

Viraj Grp., Ltd. v. United States, 162 F. Supp. 2d 656 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

Thai I-Mei Frozen Foods Co., Ltd. v. United States, 616 F.3d 1300 (Fed. Cir. 2010).

SKF USA Inc. v. United States, 19 Ct. Int'l Trade 625 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).

Qingdao Sea-Line Trading Co. v. United States, 766 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2014).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(l)(1988) — 1 case

Shieldalloy Metallurgical Corp. v. United States, 975 F. Supp. 361 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1997).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(l)(A) — 20 cases

AIMCOR v. United States, 141 F.3d 1098 (Fed. Cir. 1998).

Serampore Indus. Pvt. Ltd. v. United States Dep't of Com., 696 F. Supp. 665 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1988).

Budd Co., Wheel & Brake Div. v. United States, 746 F. Supp. 1093 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1990).

Serampore Indus. Pvt. Ltd. v. United States Dep't of Com., 675 F. Supp. 1354 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1987).

Micron Tech., Inc. v. United States, 19 Ct. Int'l Trade 829 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(l)(B) — 27 cases

Asociacion Colombiana De Exportadores De Flores v. United States, 6 F. Supp. 2d 865 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

SKF USA Inc. v. United States, 254 F.3d 1022 (Fed. Cir. 2001).

Aramide Maatschappij V.o.F. v. United States, 19 Ct. Int'l Trade 1094 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).

Nsk Ltd. v. United States, 170 F. Supp. 2d 1280 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(l)(B)(i) — 5 cases

Zenith Elec. Corp. v. United States, 770 F. Supp. 648 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1991).

IPSCO, Inc. v. United States, 965 F.2d 1056 (Fed. Cir. 1992).

Novachem, Inc. v. United States, 797 F. Supp. 1033 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1992).

Funai Elec. Co., Ltd. v. United States, 713 F. Supp. 420 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1989).

Zenith Elec. Corp. v. United States, 812 F. Supp. 228 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1993).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(l)(B)(ii) — 11 cases

Alhambra Foundry Co., Ltd. v. United States, 685 F. Supp. 1252 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1988).

Floral Trade Council v. United States, 41 F. Supp. 2d 319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

Chem. Prods. Corp. v. United States, 645 F. Supp. 289 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1986).

Fed.-Mogul Corp. v. United States, 862 F. Supp. 384 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1994).

Torrington Co. v. United States, 19 Ct. Int'l Trade 403 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1995).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(l)(C) — 2 cases

Sigma Corp. v. United States, 117 F.3d 1401 (Fed. Cir. 1997).

Washington Red Raspberry Comm'n v. United States, 859 F.2d 898 (Fed. Cir. 1988).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(lXB) — 1 case

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f) — 36 cases

NTN Bearing Corp. of Am. v. United States, 248 F. Supp. 2d 1256 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

Psc Vsmpo-Avismo Corp. v. United States, 688 F.3d 751 (Fed. Cir. 2012).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(1) — 2 cases

PT. Zinus Glob. Indonesia v. United States, 2023 CIT 39 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2023).

Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coal. v. United States, 2013 CIT 130 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2013).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(1)(A) — 42 cases

United States Steel Corp. v. United States, 179 F. Supp. 3d 1114 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

Hynix Semiconductor, Inc. v. United States, 248 F. Supp. 2d 1297 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

Dillinger France S.A. v. United States, 2018 CIT 150 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

NEXTEEL Co. v. United States, 355 F. Supp. 3d 1336 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2019).

Dong-A Steel Co. v. United States, 2018 CIT 133 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(1)(A)(1994) — 1 case

Floral Trade Council v. United States, 1999 CIT 10 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(1)(C)(ii) — 1 case

Pam, S.P.A. v. United States Dep't of Com., 265 F. Supp. 2d 1362 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(2) — 60 cases

Mannesmannrohren-Werke AG v. United States, 77 F. Supp. 2d 1302 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

AK Steel Corp. v. United States, 34 F. Supp. 2d 756 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

Mid Continent Steel & Wire, Inc. v. United States, 219 F. Supp. 3d 1326 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(2)(C) — 1 case

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(2)(C)(ii) — 1 case

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(3) — 35 cases

Ntn Corp. v. United States, 306 F. Supp. 2d 1319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

NTN Bearing Corp. of Am. v. United States, 248 F. Supp. 2d 1256 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(3)(1994) — 1 case

Mitsubishi Heavy Indus., Ltd. v. United States, 54 F. Supp. 2d 1183 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(C)(ii)(I) — 1 case

Pohang Iron & Steel Co. v. United States, 1999 CIT 112 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(l) — 4 cases

ABB Inc. v. United States, 190 F. Supp. 3d 1159 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

Sinopec Sichuan Vinylon Works v. United States, 366 F. Supp. 2d 1339 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2005).

Ames True Temper v. United States, 2007 CIT 133 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).

E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. v. United States, 22 Ct. Int'l Trade 19 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(l)(A) — 49 cases

Am. Silicon Tech. v. United States, 261 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2001).

Thai Plastic Bags Indus. Co. v. United States, 746 F.3d 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2014).

Hyundai Elec. Indus. Co. v. United States, 342 F. Supp. 2d 1141 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

Floral Trade Council v. United States, 41 F. Supp. 2d 319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(l)(A)(1994) — 1 case

Floral Trade Council v. United States, 41 F. Supp. 2d 319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(l)(B) — 1 case

Usec, Inc. v. United States, 498 F. Supp. 2d 1337 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(l)(C) — 1 case

Pam, S.P.A. v. United States Dep't of Com., 265 F. Supp. 2d 1362 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2003).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(l)(C)(i) — 1 case

Nucor Corp. v. United States, 612 F. Supp. 2d 1264 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(l)(C)(ii) — 3 cases

Nucor Corp. v. United States, 612 F. Supp. 2d 1264 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

Agro Dutch Foods Ltd. v. United States, 110 F. Supp. 2d 950 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2000).

Pohang Iron & Steel Co. v. United States, 1999 CIT 112 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(f)(l)(C)(iii) — 2 cases

Nucor Corp. v. United States, 612 F. Supp. 2d 1264 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

Agro Dutch Foods Ltd. v. United States, 110 F. Supp. 2d 950 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2000).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(fXl)(A) — 1 case

Saha Thai Steel Pipe (Pub.) Co. v. United States, 2009 CIT 116 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(i)(l)(A)(1996) — 1 case

Thai Pineapple Pub. Co. v. United States, 187 F.3d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1999).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(l) — 3 cases

Mueller Comercial De Mexico, S. De R.L. De C v. v. United States, 753 F.3d 1227 (Fed. Cir. 2014).

Ntn Corp. v. United States, 306 F. Supp. 2d 1319 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004).

Sharp Corp. v. United States, 16 Ct. Int'l Trade 568 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1992).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(l)(3) — 1 case

AK Steel Corp. v. United States, 34 F. Supp. 2d 756 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(l)(A) — 1 case

Washington Red Raspberry Comm'n v. United States, 657 F. Supp. 537 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1987).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(l)(B)(i)(1994) — 1 case

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(l)(b)(i) — 1 case

SKF USA Inc. v. United States, 263 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2001).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(l)(b)(ii) — 1 case

SKF USA Inc. v. United States, 263 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2001).

— 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(á) — 1 case

Zhejiang Native Produce & Animal By-Prods. Imp. & Exp. Grp. Corp. v. United States, 2009 CIT 61 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009).

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.