Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 111 / Friday, June 11, 2021 / Notices 31277 

2The petitioner is Daikin America, Inc. 

3See Petitioner’s Letters, ‘‘Granular 

Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from India: Request 

to Extend Due Date for Preliminary Determination,’’ 

dated June 3, 2021; and ‘‘Granular 

Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from Russia: Request 

to Extend Due Date for Preliminary Determination,’’ 

dated June 3, 2021. 

4 Id. 

1See Requestors Letters, ‘‘Certain Hardwood 

Plywood Products from the People’s Republic of 

China: Request for Scope Ruling,’’ dated April 6, 

2018 (Initial Scope Ruling Request); and ‘‘Certain 

Hardwood Plywood Products from the People’s 

Republic of China: Amendment to Request for 

Scope Ruling,’’ dated July 13, 2018 (Amended 

Scope Ruling Request). 

2See Memorandum, ‘‘Final Scope Ruling for 

Certain Hardwood Plywood Products from the 

People’s Republic of China: Request by the 

Coalition for Fair Trade in Hardwood Plywood and 

Masterbrand Cabinets Inc.,’’ dated September 7, 

2018 (Final Scope Ruling) at 1; see also See Certain 

Hardwood Plywood Products from the People’s 

Republic of China: Amended Final Determination 

of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Antidumping 

Duty Order, 83 FR 504 (January 4, 2018); and 

Certain Hardwood Plywood Products from the 

People’s Republic of China: Countervailing Duty 

Order, 82 FR 513 (January 4, 2018) (collectively, 

Orders). 

3See Fabuwood Cabinetry Corp. v. United States, 

469 F. Supp. 3d 1373, 1383–84 (CIT August 19, 

2020). 

4 Id., 469 F. Supp. 3d at 1389. 

5See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant 

to Court Remand, Fabuwood Cabinetry Corp. v. 

United States, Consol. Court No. 18–00208, Slip 

Op. 20–121 (CIT August 19, 2020), at 8–11, 16–18, 

available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/ 

20-121.pdf. 

6 Id. at 20–28, 31–32. 

7See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F. 2d 337, 

341 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken). 

8See Diamond Sawblades Manufactures 

Coalition v. United States, 626 F. 3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 

2010) (Diamond Sawblades). 

On June 3, 2021, the petitioner 2

submitted a timely request that 

Commerce postpone the preliminary 

determinations in these LTFV 

investigations.3 The petitioner stated 

that it requests postponement so that 

Commerce may review the petitioner’s 

comments on the questionnaire 

responses, issue supplemental 

questionnaires, and conduct a complete 

and thorough analysis in these 

investigations.4

For the reasons stated above, and 

because there are no compelling reasons 

to deny the request, Commerce, in 

accordance with section 733(c)(1)(A) of 

the Act, is postponing the deadline for 

the preliminary determinations by 50 

days (i.e., 190 days after the date on 

which these investigations were 

initiated). As a result, Commerce will 

issue its preliminary determinations no 

later than August 25, 2021. In 

accordance with section 735(a)(1) of the 

Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(1), the 

deadline for the final determinations in 

these investigations will continue to be 

75 days after the date of the preliminary 

determinations, unless postponed at a 

later date. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice is issued and published 

pursuant to section 733(c)(2) of the Act 

and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1). 

Dated: June 7, 2021. 

Christian Marsh, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement 

and Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2021–12316 Filed 6–10–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–051; C–570–052] 

Certain Hardwood Plywood Products 

From the People’s Republic of China: 

Notice of Court Decision Not in 

Harmony With Final Scope Ruling and 

Notice of Amended Final Scope Ruling 

Pursuant to Court Decision 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On May 27, 2021, the U.S 

Court of International Trade (CIT) 

issued its final judgment in Fabuwood 

Cabinetry Corp. v. United States, 

Consol. Court no. 18–00208, sustaining 

the Department of Commerce 

(Commerce)’s first remand 

redetermination pertaining to the scope 

ruling for the antidumping duty (AD) 

and countervailing duty (CVD) orders 

on certain hardwood plywood products 

(hardwood plywood) from the People’s 

Republic of China (China). Commerce is 

notifying the public that the CIT’s final 

judgment in this case is not in harmony 

with Commerce’s scope ruling, and that 

Commerce is withdrawing its scope 

ruling because the request suffered from 

several critical deficiencies. 

DATES: Applicable June 6, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kabir Archuletta, 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) 482–4047. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On September 7, 2018, Commerce 

found hardwood plywood in three 

product categories, described by the 

Coalition for Fair Trade in Hardwood 

Plywood and Masterbrand Cabinets Inc. 

(collectively, the requestors) in their 

Amended Scope Ruling Request,1 to be 

within the scope of the Orders.2 As a 

result of the Final Scope Ruling, 

Commerce instructed U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) to continue the 

suspension of liquidation of entries of 

certain hardwood plywood products 

from China, including the plywood in 

the three product categories described 

by the requestors in their Amended 

Scope Ruling Request. 

Fabuwood Cabinetry Corp., Cubitac 

Cabinetry Corp., CNC Associates, N.Y., 

Inc., and Ikea Supply AG appealed 

Commerce’s Final Scope Ruling. On 

August 19, 2020, the CIT remanded the 

Final Scope Ruling to Commerce, 

holding that Commerce’s scope ruling 

failed to address: (1) The threshold 

question of whether the product 

definitions in the requestors’ Amended 

Scope Ruling Request were specific 

enough to provide an adequate basis for 

a scope ruling, consistent with 19 CFR 

351.225(c)(1); and (2) the opposing 

comments submitted by the interested 

parties with respect to the sufficiency of 

the accompanying supporting 

evidence.3 Accordingly, the CIT held 

that the Final Scope Ruling was invalid 

and remanded it to Commerce to further 

explain its acceptance of the Amended 

Scope Ruling Request in light of 

opposing comments submitted by 

interested parties.4

In its final remand redetermination 

issued in January 2021, Commerce 

revisited the record and determined that 

the Amended Scope Ruling Request 

provided a sufficiently-specific 

description of the products in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(c)(1).5

However, in reexamining the record, 

Commerce determined that the 

Amended Scope Ruling Request, 

including record evidence 

accompanying the Initial Scope Ruling 

Request which remained on the record, 

did not meet the requirements of 19 CFR 

351.225(c)(1), because it suffered from 

several deficiencies that must be 

remedied before Commerce is able to 

evaluate the products for which the 

requestors were seeking a scope ruling.6

Timken Notice 

In its decision in Timken,7 as clarified 

by Diamond Sawblades,8 the Court of 

Appeals for the Federal Circuit held 

that, pursuant to sections 516A(c) and 

(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 

(the Act), Commerce must publish a 

notice of a 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 

May 27, 2021, judgment constitutes a 

final decision of the CIT that is not in 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
31278 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 111 / Friday, June 11, 2021 / Notices 

1See Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the 

People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and 

Preliminary Determination of No Shipments; 2019– 

2020, 86 FR 15195 (March 22, 2021) (Preliminary 

Results). 

2Allied Pacific Food (Dalian) Co., Ltd./Allied 

Pacific (HK) Co., Ltd./Allied Pacific Aquatic 

Products (Zhanjiang) Co., Ltd/Allied Pacific 

Aquatic Products (Zhongshan) Co., Ltd. comprise 

the single entity Allied Pacific. See Certain Frozen 

Warmwater Shrimp from the People’s Republic of 

China and Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof 

from the People’s Republic of China: Notice of 

Implementation of Determinations Under Section 

129 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act and 

Partial Revocation of the Antidumping Duty Orders, 

78 FR 18958, 18959 (March 28, 2013) (Exclusion 

Notice). Additionally, Allied Pacific is excluded 

from the order with respect to merchandise 

exported by Allied Pacific (HK) Co., Ltd., or Allied 

Pacific Food (Dalian) Co., Ltd., and manufactured 

by Allied Pacific Aquatic Products (Zhanjiang) Co., 

Ltd., or Allied Pacific Aquatic Products 

(Zhongshan) Co., Ltd., or Allied Pacific Food 

(Dalian) Co., Ltd. See Exclusion Notice, 78 FR at 

18959. Allied Pacific submitted a no shipment 

certification for exports outside the above 

combinations. See Allied Pacific’s Letter, ‘‘Certain 

Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People’s 

Republic of China: Notice of No Shipments,’’ dated 

April 27, 2020. 

3Shantou Red Garden Food Processing Co., Ltd./ 

Shantou Red Garden Foodstuff Co., Ltd. comprise 

the single entity Shantou Red Garden Foods. See 

Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the 

People’s Republic of China: Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and 

Final Determination of No Shipments; 2018–2019, 

85 FR 83891 (December 23, 2020). 

4Zhanjiang Guolian is excluded from the order 

with respect to merchandise produced and exported 

by Zhanjiang Guolian. See Notice of Amended Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 

Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Frozen 

Warmwater Shrimp from the People’s Republic of 

China, 70 FR 5149, 5152 (February 1, 2005). 

Zhanjiang Guolian submitted a no shipment 

certification for exports outside the above 

combination. See Zhanjiang Guolian’s Letter, 

‘‘Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the 

People’s Republic of China: Notice of No 

Shipments,’’ dated May 15, 2020. 

5See Notice of Amended Final Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping 

Duty Order: Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp 

from the People’s Republic of China, 70 FR 5149 

(February 1, 2005). 

6See Non-Market Economy Antidumping 

Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 

FR 65694 (October 24, 2011). 

harmony with Commerce’s Final Scope 

Ruling. Thus, this notice is published in 

fulfillment of the publication 

requirement of Timken. Additionally, 

Commerce will continue the suspension 

of liquidation of hardwood plywood 

subject to the Final Scope Ruling 

pending expiration of the period of 

appeal or, if appealed, pending a final 

and conclusive court decision. 

Amended Final Scope Ruling 

In accordance with the CIT’s May 27, 

2021, final judgement Commerce finds 

that the Final Scope Ruling must be 

withdrawn because it was based on a 

deficient request for a scope ruling. 

Notification to CBP 

In the event that the CIT’s ruling is 

not appealed, or, if appealed, upheld by 

a final and conclusive court decision, 

Commerce will notify CBP that its Final 

Scope Ruling is withdrawn and the 

instructions issued in accordance with 

that ruling are no longer applicable. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice is issued and published in 

accordance with section 516A(e)(1) of 

the Act. 

Dated: June 4, 2021. 

Ryan Majerus, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and 

Negotiations. 

[FR Doc. 2021–12269 Filed 6–10–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–893] 

Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp 

From the People’s Republic of China: 

Final Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review and Final 

Determination of No Shipments; 2019– 

2020 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(Commerce) determines that four 

exporters subject to this administrative 

review had no shipments of certain 

frozen warmwater shrimp (shrimp) from 

the People’s Republic of China (China) 

during the period of review (POR) 

February 1, 2019, through January 31, 

2020. We also determine that the 125 

remaining companies subject to this 

review are part of the China-wide entity 

because they failed to demonstrate their 

eligibility for separate rates. 

DATES: Applicable June 11, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jasun Moy, 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) 482–8194. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On March 22, 2021, Commerce 

published the preliminary results of this 

administrative review.1 We invited 

parties to comment on the Preliminary 

Results. No party submitted comments. 

Accordingly, the final results remain 

unchanged from the Preliminary 

Results. 

Scope of the Order 

The products covered by this order 

are shrimp from China. For a complete 

description of the scope, see Appendix 

II. 

Final Determination of No Shipments 

Commerce preliminarily found that: 

(1) Allied Pacific; 2 (2) Shantou Red 

Garden Foods; 3 (3) Zhangzhou Hongwei 

Foods Co., Ltd. (Zhangzhou Hongwei); 

and (4) Zhanjiang Guolian Aquatic 

Products Co., Ltd. (Zhanjiang Guolian) 

had no shipments during the POR.4 As 

noted in the Preliminary Results, we 

received no shipment statements from 

the four exporters identified above, and 

the statements were consistent with the 

information we received from U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP). 

No party commented on our 

preliminary no-shipment findings with 

respect to Allied Pacific, Shantou Red 

Garden Foods, Zhangzhou Hongwei, 

and Zhanjiang Guolian. Therefore, for 

these final results, we continue to find 

that these four exporters had no 

shipments of subject merchandise to the 

United States during the POR. 

China-Wide Entity 

With the exception of Allied Pacific, 

Shantou Red Garden Foods, Zhangzhou 

Hongwei, and Zhanjiang Guolian, we 

find all other companies for which a 

review was requested to be part of the 

China-wide entity because they failed to 

file no-shipment statements, separate 

rate applications, or separate rate 

certifications. Accordingly, the 

companies listed in Appendix I are part 

of the China-wide entity. 

Because no party requested a review 

of the China-wide entity, and Commerce 

no longer considers the China-wide 

entity as an exporter conditionally 

subject to administrative reviews, we 

did not conduct a review of the Chinawide entity. The rate previously 

established for the China-wide entity is 

112.81 percent and is not subject to 

change as a result of this review.5

Assessment Rates 

We have not calculated any 

assessment rates in this administrative 

review. Based on record evidence, we 

have determined that Allied Pacific, 

Shantou Red Garden Foods, Zhangzhou 

Hongwei, and Zhanjiang Guolian had no 

shipments of subject merchandise, and, 

therefore, pursuant to Commerce’s 

assessment practice, any suspended 

entries entered under their case 

numbers will be liquidated at the Chinawide entity rate.6


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES