MEXICO – DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON BEEF AND RICE
Document: Complaint with Respect to Rice Understanding between the United States and Mexico Regarding Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU
Date: 19 January 2007
Document codes: WT/DS295/15
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Mexico
Third parties: China, EU, Turkey
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 12.5, 12.7, 19.3, 11.9, 21.1, 21.2, 32.1, 12.1.1  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI:2  GATT 1994Art. 1, 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5, 4.1, 5.8, 6.1, 6.2, 6.4, 6.8, 6.9, 6.10, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 11.1, 12.1, 12.2, 11.9, 18.1, 19.3, 21.1, 21.2, 32.1  Anti-dumping

MEXICO – DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON BEEF AND RICE

Complaint with Respect to Rice

Understanding between the United States and Mexico
Regarding Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU

 The following communication, dated 16 January 2007, from the delegation of the
United States and the delegation of Mexico to th e Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is
circulated at the request of these delegations.

 The United States and Mexico would like to inform the Dispute Settlement Body of the
attached "Agreement between th e United States and Mexico Regarding Procedures under Articles 21
and 22 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding" with respect to the dispute (Complaint with Respect to Rice) (DS295).

We request that you please circulate the attached agreement to the Members of the Dispute
Settlement Body.

Agreement between the United States and Mexico Regarding Procedures

under Articles 21 and 22 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding

 On 20 December 2005, the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) adopted its recommendations and
rulings in the dispute (Complaint with
Respect to Rice) (WT/DS295). On 18 May 2006, the United States and Mexico (collectively, the
"Parties") informed the DSB that, pursuant to Article 21.3(b) of the Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes ("DSU"), they had agreed that, with respect to the
DSB's recommendations and rulings regarding para graph 8.5 of the Panel Report () and
paragraph 350(d) of the Appellate Body Report (), the reasonable period of time
would be 12 months, expiring on 20 December 2006. This notification was circulated to WTO
Members on 24 May 2006 (WT/DS295/12).

 The reasonable period of time expired on 20 D ecember 2006. Therefore, the Parties have
agreed on the following procedures for purposes of this dispute:
1. If the United States deems it appropriate to invoke Article 21.5 of the DSU, the United States
will request that Mexico enter into consultations with the United States. The Parties agree to
hold such consultations within 15 days from the date of receipt of the request.

2. After the 15-day period referenced in paragr aph 1 has elapsed, the United States may request
the establishment of a panel pursuant to DSU Ar ticle 21.5 (the "compliance panel") at any
time.

3. At the first DSB meeting at which the U.S. request for the establishment of a compliance
panel appears as an item on the agenda, Mexico will accept the establishment of that panel.

4. The Parties will cooperate to enable the co mpliance panel to circulate its report within
90 days of the panel's composition, excluding such time as the panel's work may be
suspended pursuant to Article 12.12 of the DSU.

5. In case of an appeal of the compliance panel report, the Parties will cooperate to enable the
Appellate Body to circulate its report within 90 days from the date of notification of the
appeal to the DSB.

6. The United States may request authorization to suspend concessions or other obligations
pursuant to DSU Article 22.2 simultaneously w ith or at any time after a request for the
establishment of the compliance panel pursuant to paragraph 2. Mexico will not assert that
the United States is precluded from obtaining such DSB authorization because its request was
made outside the time period specified in Article 22.6 of the DSU.

7. If the United States requests authorization to suspend concessions or other obligations
pursuant to Article 22.2 of the DSU, in accord ance with Article 22.6 of the DSU Mexico will
object to the level of suspension of concessions or other obligations and/or claim that the
principles and procedures set forth in DSU Article 22.3 have not been followed.

8. If the matter has been referred to Article 22.6 arbitration prior to adoption by the DSB of its
recommendations and rulings in the Article 21.5 proceedings, the Parties will request that the
Article 22.6 arbitrator suspend its work.

9. In the event that the DSB rules that a measure taken to comply does not exist or is
inconsistent with a covered agre ement, either party may request the Article 22.6 arbitrator to
resume its work. The Parties will cooperate to enable the arbitrator to circulate its report
within 60 days of the resumption of its work.

10. In the event that the DSB finds that Me xico has complied with the recommendations and
rulings of the DSB, the United States will withdraw its request under Article 22.2 of the DSU,
thereby terminating the arbitration procedure.

11. The Parties will cooperate to facilitate the pa rticipation of the orig inal panelists in the
compliance panel and the Article 22.6 arbitration.

12. If any of the original panelists is not availa ble for either the Article 21.5 compliance panel or
the Article 22.6 arbitration, or both, the Pa rties will promptly consult on a replacement
panelist, and either Party may request the Direct or-General of the WTO to appoint, as soon as
possible, a replacement for the proceeding or proceedings in which such a replacement is
required. For any such request where an or iginal panelist is unavailable to serve on the
compliance panel and the Article 22.6 arbitration, the Parties will request that in selecting a
panelist for the compliance panel, the Direct or-General seek a person who will also be
available to act in the Article 22.6 arbitration.

13. The Parties agree to continue to cooperate in all matters related to these agreed procedures
and not to raise any procedural objection to any of the steps set out herein. If, during the
application of these procedures, the Parties cons ider that a procedural aspect has not been
properly addressed, they will endeavour to find a solution within the shortest time possible
that will not affect the other agreed procedures.

14. These agreed procedures in no way prejudice other rights of either party to take any action or
procedural step to protect its rights and interests, including recourse to the DSU.

Agreed in Geneva on 16 January 2007.

 For the United States For Mexico

 (signed) (signed)
 David P. Shark Fernando de Mateo y Venturini
 Chargé d'affaires Ambassador