Case ID: f-appx_97/html/0333-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "RADER, Circuit Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

GTS INDUSTRIES S.A., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellant, and United States Steel Corporation and Bethlehem Steel Corportion, Defendants.
    No. 03-1175.
    United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
    May 13, 2004.
    John A. Ragosta, John J. Mangan, John A. Ragosta, Principal Attorneys, John R. Magnus, John W. Bohn, Hui Yu, of Counsel, Dewey Ballantine, Robert E. Lighthizer, James C. Hecht, Daniel L. Schneiderman, Jeffrey D. Gerrish, of Counsel, Skadden, Arps, Washington, DC, for Defendants.
    Merritt R. Blakeslee, Principal Attorney, J. Kevin Horgan, Wakako O. Takatori, of Counsel, Washington, DC, Marc E. Montalbine, of Counsel, Saarbrucken, GE, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    David D’Alessandris, Principal Attorney, Jeanne E. Davidson, Dean A. Pinkert, Lucius B. Lau, John D. Mclnerney, David M. Cohen, of Counsel, Washington, DC, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before MICHEL, RADER, and SCHALL, Circuit Judges.
   RADER, Circuit Judge.

After an initial remand, the United States Court of International Trade affirmed the determination of the Department of Commerce that the countervailing duty rate on GTS Industries S.A.’s products should be 0 percent ad valorem. GTS Indus. S.A. v. United States, 246 F.Supp.2d 1311 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2002); GTS Indus. S.A. v. United States, 182 F.Supp.2d 1369 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2002). In a separate yet related case that was argued concurrently, this court ruled that the Court of International Trade did not err in ruling that Commerce may not employ the same-person methodology in calculating countervailing duty rate. Allegheny Ludlum Corp. v. United States, 367 F.3d 1339 (Fed.Cir.2004). Accordingly, this court affirms.