Court Opinion

ID: 9556720
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-18 13:01:41.254522+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:01:10.111239
License: Public Domain

Slip Op. 23-

               UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE

 SUZANO S.A. (F/K/A SUZANO PAPEL E
 CELULOSE S.A.),

               Plaintiff,

        v.

 UNITED STATES,                                  Before: Gary S. Katzmann, Judge
                                                 Court No. 21-00069
               Defendant,

        and

 DOMTAR CORPORATION,

               Defendant-Intervenor.

                                        JUDGMENT

       Following two remand orders, see Suzano S.A. v. United States, 46 CIT __, __, 589 F.

Supp. 3d 1225, 1228 (2022), ECF No. 56; Suzano S.A. v. United States (“Suzano II”), 47 CIT __,

__, 633 F. Supp. 3d 1232, 1238–43 (2023), ECF No. 67, the U.S. Department of Commerce

(“Commerce”) submitted the Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, July

19, 2023, ECF No. 68 (“Second Remand Results”). Plaintiff Suzano S.A. and Defendant-

Intervenor Domtar Corporation are not submitting additional comments, and all parties request

that the court enter judgment sustaining the Second Remand Results. See Joint Status Report

Concerning the Remand Redetermination at 2, Aug. 10, 2023, ECF No. 70.

       In the first remand proceedings, Plaintiff opposed and Defendant-Intervenor supported

Commerce’s inclusion of derivative losses in Suzano’s financial expense rate. See Suzano II, 633

F. Supp. 3d at 1234–35. On second remand, Commerce “continue[d] to find that Suzano’s
Court No. 21-00069                                                                              Page 2

derivative losses are not extraordinary and that it is reasonable to include the derivative losses in

the calculation of Suzano’s financial expense rate.” Second Remand Results at 18. Commerce

also stated:

        While we continue to find that Suzano’s derivative losses are not extraordinary,
        given the facts at issue, a reasonable mind may not conclude that the significant
        derivative losses are reflective of only Suzano’s costs but, rather, that these costs
        are associated with Suzano’s expanded operations, including Fibria’s
        operations. . . . Accordingly, for the purposes of this case, we . . . rely on the
        calculation of Suzano’s financial expenses to reflect the combination of Suzano and
        Fibria’s financial expenses and cost of sales as reported by Suzano.

Id. at 20 (emphasis in original). Particular to the facts of this case, Commerce’s decision to

“revise[] Suzano’s financial expense rate to include Fibria’s financial expenses and cost of sales”

reduced the dumping margin from 32.31 percent to 8.63 percent. Id. at 24–25. Plaintiff and

Defendant-Intervenor now request judgment “[w]ithout waiving their rights in any other

proceedings and without expressing support for any factual findings or legal conclusions in the

Second Remand Results.” Status Report at 2.

        It is hereby:

        ORDERED that the Second Remand Results are SUSTAINED; and it is further

        ORDERED that the entries at issue in this litigation shall be liquidated in accordance with

the final court decision in this action as provided in 19 U.S.C. § 1516a(e) and in accordance with

the Order for Statutory Injunction, Mar. 5, 2021, ECF No. 11.

                                                      /s/     Gary S. Katzmann
                                                      Gary S. Katzmann, Judge

Dated: August 18, 2023
       New York, New York