Maquilacero S.A. De C.V. v. United States, 282 F. Supp. 3d 1353 (2018)

Feb. 9, 2018 · United States Court of International Trade · Slip Op. 18–8; Court No. 15–00287
282 F. Supp. 3d 1353
MAQUILACERO S.A. DE C.V., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant, and Wheatland Tube Company, Defendant-Intervenor.

MAQUILACERO S.A. DE C.V., Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES, Defendant,
and
Wheatland Tube Company, Defendant-Intervenor.

Slip Op. 18-8
Court No. 15-00287

United States Court of International Trade.

Dated: February 9, 2018

John M. Gurley and Diana Dimitriuc-Quaia, Arent Fox LLP of Washington, DC, for plaintiff.

Elizabeth A. Speck, Senior Trial Counsel, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, for defendant. With her on the brief were Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Jeanne E. Davidson, Director, and Claudia Burke, Assistant Director. Of counsel on the brief was Lydia C. Pardini, Attorney, Office of the Chief Counsel for Trade Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, of Washington, DC.

Jordan C. Kahn and Roger B. Schagrin, Schagrin Associates of Washington, DC, for defendant-intervenor.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Eaton, Judge:

Before the court are the United States Department of Commerce's ("Commerce") Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand (Dep't Commerce Nov. 27, 2017), ECF No. 51-1 ("Remand Results"). The Remand Results carry out the court's direction in Maquilacero S.A. de C.V. v. United States , 41 CIT ----, 256 F.Supp.3d 1294 (2017) that "Commerce ... find that stenciling is not required for Maquilacero's products to be excluded from the scope of the Order and that, based on Prolamsa's Final Scope Ruling, the analysis found on pages 6-9 of the Final Scope Ruling, and this opinion, Maquilacero's pipe [be] excluded from the Order." Maquilacero , 41 CIT at ----, 256 F.Supp.3d at 1314. Commerce complied and found that Maquilacero's pipe was excluded from the Order. See Remand Results at 12. Both plaintiff and defendant agree that Commerce's Remand Results complied with the court's direction in Maquilacero , and defendant-intervenor did not file comments regarding the Remand *1354Results. See Pl.'s Comments on Remand Results, ECF No. 53; Def.'s Resp. Comments Regarding Remand Results, ECF No. 54. Therefore, in accordance with the forgoing, and upon consideration of the papers and proceedings had herein, it is hereby

ORDERED that Commerce's Remand Results are sustained.

Judgment shall be entered accordingly.