Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Commerce International Trade Administration [A-351-857]
 AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
 SUMMARY: On January 24, 2025, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) issued its final judgment in 
                        *Apiário Diamante Comercial Exportadora Ltda. and Apiário Diamante Produção e Comercial de Mel Ltda.*
                         v. 
                        *United States,*
                         Court No. 22-00185, sustaining the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce)'s first remand redetermination pertaining to the antidumping (AD) duty investigation of raw honey (honey) from Brazil covering the period of investigation April 1, 2020, through March 31, 2021. Commerce is notifying the public that the CIT's final judgment is not in harmony with Commerce's final determination in the investigation, and that Commerce is amending the final determination and the resulting AD order with respect to the dumping margins assigned to Apiário Diamante Comercial Exportadora Ltda/Apiário Diamante Produção e Comercial de Mel Ltda (Supermel) and all other producers and/or exporters of subject merchandise.
 DATES: Applicable February 3, 2025.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Miranda Bourdeau, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2021.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  Background On April 14, 2022, Commerce published its 
                    *Final Determination*
                     in the less-than-fair value investigation of honey from Brazil.[1]
                    
                     In its 
                    *Final Determination,*
                     Commerce found that Supermel: (1) failed to provide requested source documentation; [2]
                    
                     and (2) supplied cost of production (COP) data that were irreconcilable to the information supplied by its raw honey suppliers.[3]
                    
                     Accordingly, Commerce found that Supermel's COP data were unverifiable and that Supermel failed to act to the best of its ability in responding to Commerce's requests for information. Commerce declined to rely on Supermel's COP data for the 
                    *Final Determination*
                     and, instead, Commerce relied entirely on facts otherwise available with adverse inferences (AFA) for assigning an estimated dumping margin to Supermel.[4]
                    
                     Because the only rate from the 
                    *Final Determination*
                     that was not zero, 
                    *de minimis,*
                     or based entirely on AFA was the rate calculated for another respondent, the rate calculated for the other respondent was also assigned as the rate for all other producers and exporters.[5]
                    
                     Commerce subsequently published the AD order on honey from Brazil.[6] Supermel appealed Commerce's 
                    *Final Determination.*
                     On June 5, 2024, the CIT remanded the 
                    *Final Determination*
                     to Commerce, holding that the discrepancies between Supermel's reported COP data and its suppliers' COP data were: (1) relatively minor; (2) understandable given the beekeepers' lack of recordkeeping; and (3) unnecessary for verifying Supermel's COP information, given that copious information already existed on the record that Commerce could have used to support relying on Supermel's COP.[7]
                    
                     The CIT remanded the 
                    *Final Determination*
                     to Commerce to reconsider, based on the existing record, its decision to apply AFA to Supermel and to determine a new estimated dumping margin for Supermel.[8] In its remand redetermination, issued in August 2024, Commerce relied on the information already in existence on the record to support Supermel's COP, and therefore Commerce calculated estimated weighted-average dumping margins for Supermel and all other producers and/or exporters rather than relying on AFA.[9]
                    
                     The CIT sustained Commerce's final redetermination.[10] Timken Notice In its decision in 
                    *Timken,*[11]
                    
                     as clarified by 
                    *Diamond Sawblades,*[12]
                    
                     the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant to section 516A(c) and (e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Commerce must publish a notice of court decision that is not “in harmony” with a Commerce determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a “conclusive” court decision. The CIT's January 24, 2025, judgment constitutes a final decision of the CIT that is not in harmony with Commerce's 
                    *Final Determination.*
                     Thus, this notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of 
                    *Timken.* Amended Final Determination Because there is now a final court judgment, Commerce is amending its 
                    *Final Determination*
                     with respect to Supermel and all other producers and/or exporters as follows:
                    ( print page 9226) Exporter
Estimated
                             weighted-average 
                             dumping margin 
                             (percent)Apiário Diamante Comercial Exportadora Ltda/Apiário Diamante Produção e Comercial de Mel Ltda (Supermel)
10.52All Others
9.38
 Amended AD Order Pursuant to 735(c)(2) of the Act, Commerce shall “issue an antidumping duty order under section 736(a)” of the Act when the final determination is affirmative. As a result of this amended final determination, Commerce is hereby amending the 
                    *Order*
                     to revise the estimated weighted-average dumping margins assigned to Supermel and all-other producers and/or exporters of subject merchandise, as noted above. Cash Deposit Requirements Because Supermel does not have a superseding cash deposit rate, 
                    *i.e.,*
                     there have been no final results published in a subsequent administrative review, and because of the change to the rate assigned to all other producers and exporters of subject merchandise, Commerce will issue revised cash deposit instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Notification to Interested Parties This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(c) and (e) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: February 4, 2025. Abdelali Elouaradia, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.


# Footnotes

1.
    
                         
                        *See Raw Honey from Brazil: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value,*87 FR 22182 (April 14, 2022) (
                        *Final Determination*), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (IDM). Back to Citation
 2.
    
                         
                        *See Final Determination*
                         IDM at 12-17. Back to Citation
 3.
    
                         
                        *Id.*
                         at 12-14. Back to Citation
 4.
    
                         
                        *See Final Determination,*
                         87 FR at 22183. Back to Citation
 5.
    
                         
                        *Id.* Back to Citation
 6.
    
                         
                        *See Raw Honey from Argentina, Brazil, India, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Antidumping Duty Orders,*87 FR 35501 (June 10, 2022) (
                        *Order*). Back to Citation
 7.
    
                         
                        *See Apiário Diamante Comercial Exportadora Ltda. and Apiário Diamante Produção e Comercial de Mel Ltda.*
                         v. 
                        *United States,*
                         Court No. 22-00185, Slip Op. 24-64 (CIT June 5, 2024) at 15-16. Back to Citation
 8.
    
                         
                        *Id.*
                         at 43. Back to Citation
 9.
    
                         
                        *See*
                         Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, 
                        *Apiário Diamante Comercial Exportadora Ltda. and Apiário Diamante Produção e Comercial de Mel Ltda.*
                         v. 
                        *United States,*
                         Court No. 22-00185, Slip Op. 24-64 (CIT June 5, 2024), dated August 26, 2024. Back to Citation
 10.
    
                         
                        *See Apiário Diamante Comercial Exportadora Ltda. and Apiário Diamante Produção e Comercial de Mel Ltda.*
                         v. 
                        *United States,*
                         Court No. 22-00185, Slip Op. 25-10 (CIT January 24, 2025). Back to Citation
 11.
    
                         
                        *See Timken Co.*
                         v. 
                        *United States,*
                         893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (
                        *Timken*). Back to Citation
 12.
    
                         See 
                        *Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition*
                         v. 
                        *United States,*
                         626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (
                        *Diamond Sawblades*). Back to Citation


[FR Doc. 2025-02416 Filed 2-7-25; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P