Commerce Department Confirms Dumping of Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India Estimated reading time: 4–5 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has announced the final results of the antidumping duty review for finished carbon steel flanges imported from India. The review covered the period from August 1, 2023, through July 31, 2024. According to the Department, these products were sold in the United States at prices less than their normal value. The Commerce Department conducted an administrative review of the antidumping duty order first published on August 24, 2017. The review was part of its ongoing efforts to ensure fair competition and compliance with international trade laws. Norma Group, comprised of companies including Norma (India) Limited, USK Exports Private Limited, Uma Shanker Khandelwal & Co., and Bansidhar Chiranjilal, was a primary subject of this review. The Department determined a weighted-average dumping margin of 0.82% for this group. R. N. Gupta & Company Limited, another significant exporter, was determined to have a weighted-average dumping margin of 2.65%. For companies not individually examined, a rate of 1.94% was assigned based on the performance of the reviewed companies. An important development in this review was the successor-in-interest determination for Munish Forge Limited. The company underwent a name change from Munish Forge Private Limited. The Department found that the structure, operations, and management remained largely unchanged. Therefore, Munish Forge Limited is considered the same entity as its predecessor for the purposes of the antidumping duty order. The Commerce Department has outlined assessment rates for importers of the subject merchandise. These rates will be used by U.S. Customs and Border Protection to assess duties on entries during the review period. New cash deposit requirements, effective upon publication of these results, will apply to future shipments. The establishment of these antidumping duties underscores the Department’s commitment to protecting domestic industries from unfair trade practices while fostering a level playing field for U.S. businesses. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Raw Honey from India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2023-2024
U.S. Sets New Import Duties on Raw Honey from India Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has announced new findings regarding the import of raw honey from India. After a thorough investigation, it was determined that India sold raw honey in the United States at prices lower than usual during the period from June 1, 2023, to May 31, 2024. The decision was made official on June 18, 2026. The review looked into companies like Indocan Honey Private Limited and Shakti Apifoods Pvt., Ltd. These companies were found to have sold their honey at a dumping margin. This means they sold honey at unfairly low prices. The margins, or differences in price, were calculated and released. Indocan Honey Private Limited had a dumping margin of 6.98%. Shakti Apifoods Pvt., Ltd. had a margin of 1.11%. Other companies were assigned a margin of 3.99%. The U.S. government will now apply duties, or taxes, on these honey imports. This is to ensure fair competition within the U.S. market. Duties help to level the playing field for local producers. Importers must now pay cash deposits when bringing in honey from India. These deposits are based on the calculated dumping margins. The goal is to prevent unfairly cheap products from hurting U.S. industries. The cash deposit rate for companies not reviewed individually will be 3.99%. For companies previously investigated, the rate will reflect past findings. If a company has not been investigated and the producer has been, the producer’s rate will apply. For others, a standard rate of 5.87% will remain in effect. U.S. Customs and Border Protection has been instructed to assess and collect these duties. If an importer does not fulfill its duty to report reimbursements, double duties may be enforced. This decision reflects the U.S. government’s commitment to fair trade practices. It ensures that American honey producers can compete justly in the market. The American public benefits from fair competition and quality products. This notice serves to inform importers about their responsibility to adhere to these new regulations. It is important for importers to remain in compliance to avoid additional penalties. Duties and regulations like these are set to protect U.S. industries from unfair trade practices by foreign companies. It ensures that the trade remains fair for everyone involved. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain Chassis and Subassemblies Thereof From Mexico and Thailand: Countervailing Duty Orders
U.S. Department of Commerce Issues New Import Duties on Chassis from Mexico and Thailand Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has announced new countervailing duties on certain chassis and parts from Mexico and Thailand. This decision follows a confirmation by both the Department of Commerce and the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) that American industries have been hurt by the subsidized imports of these products. What Are Chassis and Subassemblies? The products affected by these new duties are chassis and their parts. Chassis are frames that can carry containers or other loads. They are used for road, marine, and rail transport. They usually include wheels, brakes, and lighting systems, among other components. Important Dates and Contact Information The new duties come into effect starting June 18, 2026. Any unprocessed entries of these products that have been brought in for consumption will be subject to these duties. For further details, interested parties can contact Jose Rivera for issues related to Mexico at (202) 482-0842, and Caroline Carroll for issues related to Thailand at (202) 482-4948. They are both from the Enforcement and Compliance division of the International Trade Administration. How Will This Affect Import Procedures? Due to the new duties, U.S. Customs and Border Protection will now assess a cash deposit equal to the calculated subsidy rates when these products are imported. The purpose is to help offset the unfair benefit given to these products by their home countries through subsidies, which harm U.S. industries. Subsidy Rates The countervailing duty rates for each company affected are noted in the Federal Register. For Mexico, companies like Hyundai de Mexico S.A. and Fruehauf de Mexico, S.A. de C.V. have a subsidy rate of 76.91%. For Thailand, the rate varies little between companies. Dee Siam Manufacturing Co., Ltd., for instance, has a rate of 10.72%, and Panus Assembly Co., Ltd. is at 9.65%. Leveraging Legal Frameworks These actions are in accordance with sections 705 and 706 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The U.S. Department of Commerce is using these legal measures to protect U.S. industries from the damage caused by unfair import practices. Next Steps for Interested Parties The Department of Commerce allows interested parties to be added to an annual inquiry list to receive updates. This service list will be updated every year. Any party wishing to be added to this list must submit their details within 30 days of the order’s publication. Exclusions in the Order Certain products are excluded from these duties. These include dry van trailers, refrigerated van trailers, and flatbed trailers. Individual chassis parts sold by themselves are not included in this probe, but when these parts come with a chassis, they fall under the order. Conclusion With these new countervailing duties, the Department of Commerce aims to even the playing field for U.S. manufacturers and protect them from the effects of these subsidized imports. Detailed information can be accessed via the Federal Register publication, under document number 2026-12329. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain Chassis and Subassemblies Thereof From Mexico, Thailand, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Antidumping Duty Orders
U.S. Puts Antidumping Duties on Chassis from Mexico, Thailand, and Vietnam Estimated reading time: 4–6 minutes On June 18, 2026, the U.S. Department of Commerce put antidumping duties on chassis from Mexico, Thailand, and Vietnam. This decision comes after finding that these countries sold chassis in the United States at less-than-fair-value prices. This means they were sold for less than it costs to make them. Commerce’s Determinations The Department of Commerce found that many companies were selling chassis for prices that hurt U.S. businesses. They published these findings on April 23, 2026. This was a part of a bigger investigation on whether trading practices were fair. International Trade Commission Involvement On June 8, 2026, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) agreed with the Commerce Department. They said the U.S. industry was being hurt by cheap chassis coming from these countries. This allowed the Commerce Department to set up duties or extra taxes on these products. Details of the Chassis Orders Chassis are frames or trailers used to carry containers. They can be used on roads, ships, or trains. This decision covers all chassis coming from Mexico, Thailand, and Vietnam, whether finished or not. Implementation Dates Antidumping duties affect chassis entries that were brought into the U.S. after September 29, 2025. The duties can now be assessed on any chassis that is still in customs or has not been settled yet. Rates of Duties Different companies in Mexico, Thailand, and Vietnam will have different duty rates. For example, in Thailand, Dee Siam Manufacturing Co., Ltd. will face duties of 72.85%. Companies from Mexico have a general rate of 32.37%. For Vietnam, all concerned exporters must pay a 186.84% duty. Custom Procedures The Department of Commerce will direct the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to collect these extra taxes. They need to keep a watch on the entries until further notice. For some time, starting from March 28, 2026, some imports were not charged duties, but that has now changed after this release. Annual Inquiry Service Lists The Department of Commerce will maintain a list each year of all parties interested in these orders. People who want to be on this list must sign up within 30 days of the order being published. This helps ensure everyone follows the new rules effectively. Final Details This step is a significant move to protect U.S. businesses from unfair competition. By applying these duties, the U.S. aims to ensure fair trading and to support its industries. The rules will affect how companies bring chassis into the country from Mexico, Thailand, and Vietnam. The order and all its details can be found published in the Federal Register under Volume 91, Number 117. This measure shows a strong commitment to maintaining a level playing field for U.S. companies and ensuring fair prices in the market. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Procedures for Submissions by Certain Steel and Aluminum Producers Committing to New U.S. Steel or Aluminum Production to Obtain Tariff Adjustments Under Proclamation 10984
U.S. Department of Commerce Seeks Public Comments on Steel and Aluminum Tariff Adjustments Process Estimated reading time: 1–3 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce is asking for public opinions on a new information collection about steel and aluminum tariffs. They want people to share their thoughts before they send the collection plan to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval. This is important to make sure the process is useful and not too hard for people to do. Deadline for Comments The deadline for sending in comments is August 17, 2026. People can write to Emily Davis at the International Trade Administration with their feedback. They should use the OMB Control Number 0625-0285 when they send their comments. Background on Tariffs Last year, on October 17, 2025, the President made a decision to change how medium- and heavy-duty vehicles and parts from other countries are brought into the United States. This change was to protect U.S. national security. The President decided that new tariffs were needed for these imports. How Tariffs are Adjusted Proclamation 10984 was made to allow changes in how much tariff companies pay when they bring in steel and aluminum from other countries. If certain companies in Canada or Mexico make commitments to produce more steel or aluminum in the U.S., they could pay less in tariffs. The tariffs cannot go below 25 percent. The aim is to boost U.S. steel and aluminum production, which in turn supports the making of important items like vehicles in the U.S. For example, automobile parts and vehicle parts are key products. Public Participation and Collection Process The plan under discussion is meant to help the Department of Commerce figure out the best way to implement these tariffs. Information such as location, production details, and investment plans from companies can help in this process. Companies in Canada and Mexico that want reduced tariffs will provide this information. Call for Comments and Participation The Department of Commerce is encouraging public comments to improve their process. They want to know if the proposed collection makes sense and is useful. This feedback will help them evaluate if the process can be simpler and better for businesses. Comments from the public will become a part of the official record. All personal details shared in comments, like names and addresses, might become public too. Sheleen Dumas, the Departmental PRA Compliance Officer, shared this important notice from the Commerce Department. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain Motorized Self-Balancing Vehicles; Notice of a Commission Determination To Review in Part a Final Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Request for Written Submissions on the Issues Under Review and on Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding
The U.S. International Trade Commission to Review Decision on Motorized Self-Balancing Vehicles Estimated reading time: 4–6 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) announced it will review a decision regarding motorized self-balancing vehicles. This decision was made by an administrative law judge who found that certain companies violated Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The companies involved include Gotrax and Tao Motor from China. The case started after a complaint was filed by Razor USA LLC and Shane Chen. They claimed that the companies imported and sold products that infringed on their patents. The patents involved are U.S. Patent No. RE46,964 and U.S. Patent No. RE49,608. The ITC is asking for written submissions on specific issues. They want to hear from the parties involved in the case. They also want input from government agencies and the public. The ITC is focusing on whether the products affected a domestic industry in the U.S. This involves checking economic investments made by Razor USA LLC. The ITC has several questions about the investments and industry activities. They want detailed answers about manufacturing and product development. The law allows the ITC to issue orders to prevent unfair imports. They can issue an exclusion order, stopping products from entering the U.S. They can also issue cease and desist orders, preventing further sales of infringing products. The ITC must also consider the public interest before making a decision. This includes looking at the effect of any orders on public health, competition, and consumer choices. If the ITC makes an order, the U.S. Trade Representative has 60 days to review or change it. During this time, products may enter the U.S. under a bond. The ITC is inviting written submissions about what kind of remedy should be ordered. They need submissions by June 29, 2026, and replies by July 6, 2026. Submissions are limited in page length. Anyone submitting documents must follow specific procedures. Confidential documents should be clearly marked and handled accordingly. This review by the ITC shows the importance of fair trade practices and protection of intellectual property. The outcome could impact how certain electronic products are sold and imported into the U.S. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain Laptops, Routers and Gateways, and Components Thereof; Notice of a Commission Determination To Review in Part an Initial Determination Granting Complainant’s Motion To Amend the Complaint and, on Review, Affirm With Modification To Also Amend the Notice of Investigation
USITC to Review ALJ Decision on Patent Infringement Case Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has announced a significant decision in an ongoing investigation. The investigation, identified as No. 337-TA-1489, concerns certain laptops, routers, gateways, and their components. The Commission has chosen to review part of an initial determination by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). This decision involves amending an existing complaint. The complaint was initially filed by AX Wireless, LLC, a company based in Austin, Texas. The company alleges that several respondents have infringed on specific claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,917,272, known as the ‘272 patent. The respondents include ASUSTeK Computer Inc., ASUS Computer International, Inc., TP-Link Systems Inc., and Ubiquiti Inc. On June 12, 2026, the Commission voted to affirm the ALJ’s decision, with a modification. This modification amends both the complaint and the notice of investigation. The amendment adds allegations of infringement concerning additional claims of the ‘272 patent. These claims are numbered 7, 9, 10, and 20. Previously, on April 23, 2026, AX Wireless had filed a motion to amend the complaint to include these dependent claims. The respondents and the Office of Unfair Import Investigations opposed this motion, suggesting more time is needed for the new claims. The ALJ granted the motion on May 19, 2026. The ALJ found good cause for including all relevant claims in one investigation. The investigation is still early, as the evidentiary hearing is ten months away. Thus, there is no prejudice to the respondents. The USITC has amended the documents to reflect these changes. This decision is made under authority provided by section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 and the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure. For further details, Houda Morad, Esq. at the USITC can be contacted. Non-confidential documents related to this investigation are available online. The USITC’s TDD terminal can provide more information for hearing-impaired individuals. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Van-Type Trailers and Subassemblies From Canada, China, and Mexico; Scheduling of the Final Phase of Countervailing Duty and Antidumping Duty Investigations
US International Trade Commission Schedules Investigation on Van-Type Trailers Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) has announced the final phase schedule for its investigation into van-type trailers and their subassemblies from Canada, China, and Mexico. The investigation, numbered 701-TA-781-782 and 731-TA-1767-1769, seeks to determine if US industries are harmed by these imports. It is also to check if these imports are sold cheaper than they should be. The investigation will review if trailers from Canada, China, and Mexico are supported by subsidies, making them cheaper in the US market. The US Department of Commerce found that China and Mexico may be giving subsidies to their exporters. But, the investigation for Canada was stopped. For the case, the USITC defines van-type trailers as those with a large closed space to carry goods. They usually have a front section, side walls, a floor, a roof, and connection systems for towing. Subassemblies like frames, walls, doors, and parts for towing and braking are all part of the investigation. Even if any of these parts are missing, the trailer is still part of this case. Some parts, especially from China covered under another investigation, are not part of this one. The USITC investigation started after a petition from the American Trailer Manufacturers Coalition in November 2025. Members include Great Dane LLC, Stoughton Trailers LLC, and Wabash National Corporation. Those wanting more details, or to participate in the case, can check the USITC’s rules. Key dates include a hearing on August 20, 2026, and deadlines for legal submissions in August 2026. Further information for the public is available electronically through the USITC’s systems and their website. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Notice of Receipt of Complaint; Solicitation of Comments Relating to the Public Interest
U.S. International Trade Commission Receives Complaint Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has received a new complaint. It is about certain convertible child highchairs. The complaint was filed by Kids2, LLC on June 12, 2026. Details of the Complaint The complaint mentions violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. It accuses some companies of importing and selling certain highchairs into the United States. These activities are considered unlawful if they violate section 337. The companies named in the complaint are: Graco Children’s Products Inc. of Atlanta, GA. Newell Brands Distribution LLC of Newville, PA. Newell Brands Inc. of Atlanta, GA. Newell Brands Canada ULC of Canada. Baby Trend, Inc. of Fontana, CA. Kids2, LLC wants the USITC to stop these companies. They are asking for a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders. They also want a bond imposed on the companies’ products during the review period by the President. Public Comments Requested The USITC is asking for public comments. They want to learn about any public interest issues related to the complaint. These comments will help them make the right decision. Comments should focus on: How the highchairs are used in the United States. Any concerns about public health, safety, or welfare. Other products made in the U.S. that could replace the highchairs. Whether Kids2, LLC and others can make enough highchairs to meet demand. The effect on U.S. consumers if the highchairs are not available. People and organizations have eight days to send their comments after this notice is published. This is important for those interested in the case. Submission Guidelines Comments should not be longer than five pages. They should mention “Docket No. 3913” clearly. The comments must be filed electronically through the Commission’s system, EDIS. No paper documents will be accepted. Instructions on how to file electronically are available in the Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures. Confidential Information If someone wants to send confidential information, they need to ask for special treatment. The request must explain why confidentiality is needed. Next Steps There will be more chances to comment after a decision is made. The USITC will continue investigating until a final decision is reached. This action follows the rules of the Tariff Act of 1930 and the USITC’s own rules. The Secretary to the Commission, Lisa Barton, issued this notice on June 15, 2026. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Van-Type Trailers and Subassemblies From Canada; Termination of investigation
Termination of Investigation on Van-Type Trailers from Canada Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes On June 5, 2026, the U.S. Department of Commerce decided to end its investigation into van-type trailers and subassemblies from Canada. This happened after the petitioner withdrew the complaint on May 27, 2026. The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) has now also ended its own investigation. This investigation was labeled as No. 701-TA-780 (Final). Both of these decisions mean that there will be no countervailing duties placed on these trailers from Canada. The public can view this decision on the ITC’s website. They can also access the electronic docket for more details. If anyone needs help or special assistance, they can contact the Office of the Secretary. The authority for this decision comes from the Tariff Act of 1930. It also follows the Commission’s rules and procedures. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission, signed the official order. For further information, people can contact Peter Stebbins at the U.S. International Trade Commission. Hearing-impaired individuals can use the TDD terminal. This decision was officially filed on June 16, 2026, under Billing Code 7020-02-P. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Phosphate Fertilizers From Morocco and Russia; Notice of Commission Determination To Conduct Full Five-Year Reviews
U.S. International Trade Commission Reviews Phosphate Fertilizers Estimated reading time: 1–3 minutes What is Happening? The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) has made an important announcement. The agency decided to conduct full reviews on phosphate fertilizers. These fertilizers come from Morocco and Russia. The USITC will look into whether removing certain duties, called countervailing duty orders, would cause harm. These duties are on phosphate fertilizers from Morocco and Russia. The commission wants to see if this change could hurt the U.S. industry. What is Countervailing Duty? A countervailing duty is a tax on imports. This tax helps to level the playing field for domestic producers against foreign producers who get government help. If the commission cancels these duties, they must check if it hurts the U.S. producers. Important Dates The review process was announced on June 5, 2026. The USITC will set a schedule for the reviews. People interested should look out for this information. Who to Contact? For more details, you can contact Camille Bryan at the USITC. The phone number is 202-205-2811. If you have trouble hearing, there is help on 202-205-1810. More Information The commission’s rules and practices can be seen online. You can visit their website at www.usitc.gov. Public records are available at their electronic docket, EDIS, which you can access at edis.usitc.gov. Conclusion The USITC’s decision is important for both domestic and international producers. The reviews will help decide whether the U.S. market needs the protection of these duties. The USITC aims to maintain fair trade practices. Issued By This update is issued by Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission. The announcement was made on June 15, 2026. For more information, keep an eye on official notices from the USITC. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Chromium Trioxide From the Republic of Türkiye: Postponement of Final Determination of Sales at Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation and Extension of Provisional Measures
Commerce Delays Decision on Chromium Trioxide Investigation Estimated reading time: 1–7 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce is delaying its final decision on the chromium trioxide investigation. This decision means that the final finding will be made on October 5, 2026. This is part of an investigation into whether chromium trioxide from Türkiye is being sold for less than it is worth. The decision to delay was made because the investigation is complicated. The investigation started on January 5, 2026, and looks at a period from July 1, 2024, to June 30, 2025. On May 22, 2026, a preliminary decision was made. This decision hinted that chromium trioxide from Türkiye might be sold at unfair prices. The company Türkiye Şişe ve Cam Fabrikaları A.Ş., also known as Şişecam, asked for the delay. The company is a major exporter involved in the investigation. By law, a request from such a significant exporter cannot be ignored without a good reason. The request also included extending provisional measures. This means certain rules will now last not four months but up to six months. If the investigation finds that chromium trioxide is priced unfairly, it may affect how this product is traded between countries. This means there could be new tariffs or rules to balance the pricing difference. This update comes from Christopher Abbott, who is responsible for policy and negotiations at the Department of Commerce. This investigation and decision follow specific rules. These rules are from the Tariff Act of 1930. The goal is to make sure trade between countries is fair. The public is alerted and informed through such notices. This information is published under regulation sections of federal law, which keeps processes transparent and open. For those interested, further details can be found on the official U.S. Government Publishing Office website. Following these processes helps ensure a fair trading environment for everyone involved. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Monosodium Glutamate From the People’s Republic China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2023-2024
Final Results of Antidumping Review on Monosodium Glutamate from China Announced Estimated reading time: 1–7 minutes Date: 2026-06-16 Location: Washington, DC The U.S. Department of Commerce has announced the final results of its administrative review of the antidumping duty order on monosodium glutamate (MSG) from the People’s Republic of China. This review covers the period from November 1, 2023, to October 31, 2024. The review found that Ajinoriki MSG (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd (Ajinoriki) has not qualified for a separate rate. As such, Ajinoriki will be considered part of the China-wide entity. During the review, it was corrected from the preliminary results that Ajinoriki is subject to a dumping margin rate for the China-wide entity, which is 56.54 percent. This rate was established based on findings from the prior 2017-2018 administrative review. The Department of Commerce published the preliminary results in February 2026 and allowed interested parties to submit comments. The petitioner, Ajinomoto Health & Nutrition North America, Inc, discovered an error in the preliminary report that listed the China-wide rate incorrectly as 40.41 percent. The correct rate is, and remains, 56.54 percent. Commerce has affirmed the petitioner’s comment, and no other comments were submitted. Therefore, no additional decision memoranda accompany this notice. The Department also explained that there are no calculations to disclose for these final results. This is because Ajinoriki, being part of the China-wide entity which was not under review, means there were no separate calculations needed. Merchants need to be aware of their responsibility for duties. The Department of Commerce will work with the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess duties. CBP will follow Commerce’s instructions on assessing the antidumping duties on MSG imported from China. The cash deposit rate for shipments of subject merchandise from China will continue as currently set. For those not receiving a separate rate, the China-wide rate of 56.54 percent applies. Importers are reminded to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties. This is crucial before CBP liquidates relevant entries. The notice reiterates the importance of compliance with duties and legal requirements for all merchants dealing with MSG imports from China. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain Steel Nails From Taiwan: Preliminary Results and Rescission, in Part, of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2024-2025
Commerce Department Finds Low Prices on Steel Nails from Taiwan Estimated reading time: 3 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has made an important announcement about steel nails from Taiwan. The department found that two companies from Taiwan sold nails in the United States at prices lower than normal. These companies are Faithful Engineering Products Co., Ltd. and Top Forever Screws Co., Ltd. They sold the nails between July 1, 2024, and June 30, 2025. The review checked if companies followed fair trade rules. The results showed Faithful Engineering and Top Forever did not. They did not respond to important questions or provide needed information. As a result, the Department of Commerce decided to apply a high dumping rate of 78.17% to these companies. Twenty other companies were also reviewed. But, for these companies, the review has been stopped. This is because there were no sales that could be checked. The Commerce Department said it will give the final results soon. They also mentioned how people can send comments about these findings. All comments must be filed online. After the final check, the Commerce Department will tell the U.S. Customs and Border Protection about the results. The customs department will use the new rates to collect duties. Finally, everyone who imports nails should know about this change. This is important because it affects how much tax they need to pay. This development marks an important step in maintaining fair trade and making sure that products are sold at proper prices. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Glycine From India: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2023
U.S. Department of Commerce Finds Subsidies for Indian Glycine Producers Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has released its final results on the countervailing duty investigation for producers and exporters of glycine from India. The review covered the period from January 1, 2023, to December 31, 2023. Findings reveal that companies like Kumar Industries, India, received financial help, known as subsidies, from the Indian government. This help makes their products cheaper and helps them compete in the U.S. market. Such assistance is termed “countervailable” when a government gives financial aid to producers or exporters in a way that affects international trade. Between late 2025 and early 2026, the Department of Commerce faced many challenges, including a government shutdown. This delayed their investigation. They extended deadlines several times, leading to the final announcement on June 8, 2026. The investigation was about “Countervailable Subsidies,” which means checking if the help the Indian companies received was against U.S. trade rules. The Department followed the laws from the Tariff Act of 1930. Kumar Industries was the main company checked in this investigation. Bajaj Healthcare Limited, another company in review, did not get separate scrutiny but was assigned the same duty rate as Kumar Industries. The duty rate is 45.33 percent, the same for both Kumar and Bajaj. This means when these companies export glycine to the U.S., they have to pay this percentage as a duty to make things fair for U.S. competitors. The Commerce Department has also instructed the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to collect these duties on shipments that arrived after the date of this announcement. This action ensures a level playing field for U.S. producers against imported goods that might be priced unfairly low due to subsidies. The Department has asked those who have access to any confidential data from the investigation to handle it responsibly, as per their duties under legal agreements. Failure to comply can result in penalties. The results ensure that U.S. domestic industries are protected from unfair foreign competition while maintaining fair trade practices. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee
U.S. Department of Commerce Seeks Members for Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes Committee’s Role and Importance The ETTAC gives important advice to the Environmental Trade Promotion Working Group. This group is part of the Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee. The committee helps in making programs that enhance U.S. exports of technologies and goods related to the environment. These goods and services help the U.S. meet environmental and safety requirements. Environmental technologies include solutions for water, waste treatment, and air quality monitoring. These technologies are crucial for building infrastructure and supporting U.S. manufacturing. They help the U.S. achieve economic and national security goals by promoting fair trade, manufacturing competitiveness, and strong supply chains. Every year, the U.S. exports about $60 billion worth of environmental technology goods and services. This sector employs nearly 1.9 million Americans. How to Nominate Someone Those who wish to nominate someone for ETTAC membership must do so by 5:00 p.m. on August 7, 2026. Applications can be submitted through the Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee web page. After applying, nominees will receive an email asking for more documents. Any questions about the process can be sent to [email protected]. Nominations should be submitted through the ITA’s ETTAC web page. After submitting a nomination, nominees need to provide additional documents via an automated email. The Department of Commerce may reach out for more information. Eligibility and Selection ETTAC will have between 30 to 45 members. Members can come from different sectors, including environmental technology companies, trade associations, and civil society groups. They will represent various U.S. interests and contribute to the committee’s goals. To be eligible, nominees must be U.S. citizens. They must not be registered as foreign agents. They should represent U.S. entities in the environmental sector involved in international trade. Responsibilities and Criteria Committee members are expected to attend about eight meetings during the term, with at least four meetings in person. They will discuss topics openly in public settings. Members should also be able to handle additional tasks like conference calls and drafting recommendations. Applicants must submit several documents, including: A sponsor letter explaining why the nominee should be considered. A biography of the nominee. Details about the company, association, or organization’s business activities. Information on the organization’s ownership if applicable. Final Selection The Secretary of Commerce will consider applications based on their ability to represent different U.S. environmental technology sectors. Selection will consider viewpoints, industry subsectors, and geography. Nominees will be informed of their selection via email. The Department of Commerce aims to ensure that the ETTAC is diverse, balanced, and able to promote U.S. environmental technology exports effectively. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Van-Type Trailers and Subassemblies Thereof From the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value
U.S. Government Finds Van-Type Trailers from China Sold at Low Prices Estimated reading time: 3 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has made a preliminary decision. It says that van-type trailers from China are being sold in the U.S. at prices lower than what they are worth. This practice is called “less than fair value” or LTFV. These trailers are generally big and used to transport goods. They are different from smaller trailers you may see on the highway. The investigation looks at the timeframe from April 1, 2025, to September 30, 2025. The Department of Commerce is inviting people to comment on its decision. This is a chance for interested parties to share their thoughts. Important Details What Are Van-Type Trailers?: These are trailers with a cover on top. They are usually rectangular in shape. Covered Parts: The investigation also includes trailer parts. These parts are included whether they are put together or not. Specific Features: These trailers weigh more than 26,000 pounds. They are big and can carry heavy loads. Impact and Actions The U.S. plans to charge more money, called a “cash deposit,” for these trailers. This will happen every time trailers from China enter the U.S. after June 15, 2026. The cash deposit rate is set at 130.86%. This means that the trailers from China could cost much more. Chinese trailers with Chinese parts that are brought through other countries are also affected. For example, trailers that come through Canada are still subject to U.S. rules. Next Steps The Department of Commerce will make a final decision later. If confirmed, these measures could change. The U.S. International Trade Commission will also look at the decision. They will see if U.S. trailer companies are harmed by the low prices. By doing this, the U.S. aims to protect its own companies. It wants to make sure they are not harmed by unfair pricing from other countries. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Fiberglass Door Panels From the People’s Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination
U.S. Department of Commerce Finds Subsidies for Fiberglass Door Panels from China Estimated reading time: 3 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has announced its final decision regarding fiberglass door panels from China. This follows extensive investigation and analysis by the Commerce Department. Investigation Overview The investigation covered fiberglass door panels, including sidelites, from January 1, 2024, through December 31, 2024. The Commerce Department found that producers and exporters in China received government subsidies for these products. Key Details The final decision was made after gathering and analyzing information from various parties. The decision follows a preliminary finding reported on August 21, 2025. The final determination aligns with other related investigations on less-than-fair-value practices. Subsidy Rates Determined Various subsidy rates were determined for different Chinese companies. The rates were calculated based on the evidence collected: Dalian Capstone Engineering Co., Ltd.: 66.22% Jiangxi Fangda Tech Co., Ltd.: 58.50% Other named companies, which did not respond to requests for information, received a rate of 186.46%. All other companies received a rate of 60.64%. Scope of the Investigation The investigation focused on fiberglass door panels from China. These panels may include fiberglass sidelites and come in various forms, such as finished, unfinished, assembled, or unassembled. The investigation covers these panels whether or not they are part of a complete door system. Outcome and Next Steps Commerce’s findings will be forwarded to the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC). The ITC will decide if these imports harm U.S. industries. If the ITC agrees, duties will be applied on future imports to level the playing field for U.S. producers. If not, the investigation ends, and all deposits collected during the process will be refunded. Conclusion The United States is focused on fair trade practices. This investigation underlines the commitment of the Department of Commerce to ensure U.S. industries get a fair chance in the global market. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Fiberglass Door Panels From People’s Republic of China: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value
U.S. Finds Fiberglass Door Panels from China Sold at Unfair Prices Estimated reading time: 2–4 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has determined that fiberglass door panels from China are being sold in the United States at unfair prices. This is called selling at less than fair value (LTFV). The decision from the Department was published on June 15, 2026. The period during which this unfair pricing was investigated ran from July 1, 2024, to December 31, 2024. This means Commerce has been looking into the pricing practices for six months to understand the situation with these imports. The Department had initially made a preliminary determination about this issue in January 2026. They found signs of unfair pricing and decided to look deeper. This final decision confirms their earlier findings. The door panels being reviewed are made from fiberglass. Fiberglass is a durable material often used for doors because it can withstand tough weather. The Department worked with Dalian Capstone Engineering Co., Ltd., and Jiangxi Fangda Tech Co., Ltd., among other companies, to ensure correct sales records were examined. They checked sales and production records closely. This process is called “verification.” The final rates of unfair pricing, called “dumping margins,” have been published. These rates indicate how much lower these products were sold in the U.S. compared to their normal value. Besides the primary determination, the Department also looked at specific issues companies brought up during the review. These included adjustments to various freight expenses and financial calculations. The U.S. intends to keep a close watch on these imports and has announced plans to continue special rules. These rules require importers to pay extra fees when they bring such products into the U.S. This aims to prevent further harm to U.S. businesses. The Department of Commerce will also inform the International Trade Commission. This body will check if the U.S. industries have been harmed by these unfair trade practices. If they find U.S. businesses hurt, further actions will be taken. This determination is a crucial step in maintaining fair trade practices and protecting U.S. industries from unfair foreign competition. The U.S. Commerce Department is committed to ensuring fair market conditions. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Welded Line Pipe From the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results and Rescission, in Part, of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2023-2024
U.S. Department of Commerce Preliminary Review on Welded Line Pipe from Korea Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has released preliminary findings regarding welded line pipe imported from the Republic of Korea. These findings relate to an administrative review conducted for the period from December 1, 2023, to November 30, 2024. Commerce preliminarily determines that some producers and exporters from Korea sold welded line pipe at prices below what is known as the “normal value.” This means they may have been selling this pipe at a lower price than usual in the United States, a practice which can harm domestic manufacturers. Companies Involved The review focused on two main companies: Hyundai Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. and SeAH Steel Corporation. Hyundai Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. faced a weighted-average dumping margin of 1.86%. On the other hand, SeAH Steel Corporation did not have a significant margin, indicated by the 0.00% rate assigned to them. Additionally, five other companies involved in the case—AJU Besteel Co., Ltd., EEW Korea Co., Ltd., Husteel Co., Ltd., Kumkang Kind Co., Ltd., and NEXTEEL Co., Ltd.—were granted the same rate as Hyundai Steel Pipe Co., Ltd., which is 1.86%. Review and Rescission During the review, the Commerce department also looked at entries from 26 companies which are now being rescinded from the review. The reason for this is that there were no suspended entries of welded line pipe from these companies during the period of review. Verification and Comments A verification of SeAH Steel Corporation’s information has been conducted as part of the review process. Interested parties in the case are invited to comment on the preliminary results of the review. These comments are part of the Department’s efforts to ensure a fair trade environment. Next Steps Commerce aims to release the final results of the review by October 2026. These final results will dictate the actions taken regarding the assessment of duties on specific import entries of welded line pipe. These findings emphasize the department’s continuous commitment to reviewing trade practices and enforcing antidumping laws to support fair competition within the U.S. market. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain TOPCon Solar Cells, Modules, Panels, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same; Notice of a Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting Tesla, Inc.’s Motion To Intervene
Tesla Gets Approval to Join Solar Cell Trade Investigation Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes On June 15, 2026, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) made an important decision. Tesla, Inc. is now allowed to join an investigation. This investigation is about certain TOPCon solar cells and other related products. What is the Investigation About? The investigation is looking into products that might be breaking U.S. trade laws. These products are being brought into the U.S. and sold. The ITC wants to find out if they are copying a U.S. patent. Who Started the Investigation? First Solar, Inc., a company from Phoenix, Arizona, started this investigation. They believe that some companies are infringing on a U.S. patent. This patent is for certain kinds of solar cells and panels. Who Are the Companies Involved? Many companies from different countries are involved in this investigation. Some are from the U.S., China, Canada, Germany, and other places. They make and sell solar products that might be using the patent without permission. Tesla’s Role in the Investigation Tesla wanted to join the investigation. They asked the ITC if they could be part of it. On April 28, 2026, Tesla filed a request. They wanted to help look into these solar products. What Did the ITC Decide? The ITC agreed to let Tesla join the investigation. This decision was made by the administrative law judge on May 11, 2026. No one disagreed with this decision. Other Details The ITC’s rules and the Tariff Act of 1930 guide this investigation. These rules help make sure companies follow U.S. trade laws. The ITC made this decision official on June 10, 2026. What Happens Next? Now that Tesla can join the investigation, the ITC will continue its work. They will look closely at the solar products in question. They want to see if any laws have been broken. This investigation is important for protecting U.S. inventions. It ensures that companies do not use ideas without permission. The ITC will keep working to find the truth in this case. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain NAND and DRAM Memory Chips and Products Containing the Same; Notice of Institution of Investigation
U.S. International Trade Commission Starts Investigation on Memory Chips Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has begun an investigation. This is related to certain NAND and DRAM memory chips and products that have these chips. The investigation was started because of a complaint by MonolithIC 3D Inc. from Allen, Texas. The complaint was filed on May 11, 2026. MonolithIC 3D Inc. says that some companies are breaking the rules. They claim these companies are bringing memory chips into the United States that infringe on their patents. A patent is a government license that gives a person or company the right to stop others from making or selling an invention. The complaint mentions several specific U.S. patents. These are U.S. Patent No. 12,250,830; U.S. Patent No. 12,362,330; U.S. Patent No. 12,400,961; U.S. Patent No. 12,464,734; and U.S. Patent No. 12,564,006. The USITC wants to check if these patents are being violated. The investigation will look at whether the accused products are being brought into the United States, sold for importation, or sold in the U.S. after they have been imported. The investigation started on June 10, 2026. The investigation will also check if there is an industry in the U.S. being harmed or just getting started because of this issue. The accused products mainly include 3D NAND memory chips and HBM DRAM memory chips. These chips are used in products like SSDs and flash memory products. The companies that are being investigated include KIOXIA Holdings Corporation and its related branches in the U.S., Japan, and Taiwan. SK hynix Inc. and its branches in the U.S. and Korea are also being investigated. These companies have to respond to the complaint within 20 days. If they don’t respond, they might lose the right to defend themselves. This could result in orders that stop them from bringing or selling their products in the U.S. The Chief Administrative Law Judge will pick a judge to oversee the investigation. This is an important investigation. It involves technology companies and memory chips that are used in many devices today. The USITC is acting to make sure that patent laws are not being broken. The information on this case can be found online. It is publicly available for those who want to learn more. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel From India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2023-2024
Page Not Found on GovInfo Estimated reading time: 3 minutes A recent error on the GovInfo website resulted in a “Page Not Found” message. Users trying to access certain information on the site were unable to do so. This has caused inconvenience for those seeking government documents and resources. Details of the Error The error message displayed reads: “Error occurred. The page you requested cannot be found.” This message indicates that the specific page the user tried to access does not exist or cannot be located on the server. The cause of this error could range from a mistyped URL to the page being moved or deleted. What to Do If You Encounter This Error Report the Error: If you come across this error, the GovInfo team requests that you report it to askGPO, which is their help service. Provide Information: When reporting, include the URL of the page you were trying to access, the steps you took when you encountered the error, any specific search terms used, and a screenshot if possible. Visit the Homepage: The error page provides a link to return to the GovInfo homepage. From there, you can try navigating to the desired information through different paths. View Search Tips: A link is also provided to search tips that might assist in locating the needed documents through more efficient search techniques. GovInfo’s Commitment GovInfo assures users that they are actively working to resolve the issue. They appreciate the users’ patience and cooperation in reporting these errors to enhance the website’s functionality. For any further assistance, users are encouraged to reach out to GovInfo’s contact support. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Glycine From India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2023-2024
Page Not Found on GovInfo Estimated reading time: 1–3 minutes A recent attempt to access certain pages on the government information website, GovInfo, resulted in a “Page Not Found” error. This can cause inconvenience for users seeking specific information. Error Occurrence The error message appears when users try to access content via specific URLs. The message indicates that the requested page could not be found on the server. What to Do The GovInfo website suggests steps to help resolve this error. Users are encouraged to report the error to askGPO. When reporting, users should provide the URL of the page they tried to access, and describe the steps they took that led to the error. They can also include specific search terms used or a screenshot showing the error. Assistance and Resources For those needing help, the website offers several resources: Users can visit the Help section for assistance. There is additional guidance on the homepage for those looking for more information or tips on searching the site. Importance of Reporting By reporting errors, users can aid in improving the website’s functionality. Prompt reporting contributes to quicker resolutions and the overall enhancement of user experience. If you experience this issue, following these steps may assist in resolving the problem effectively. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Non-Oriented Electrical Steel From Japan: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2023-2024
U.S. Department of Commerce’s Preliminary Antidumping Results for Japanese Steel Estimated reading time: 1–7 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) has announced preliminary findings of its latest review concerning antidumping duties on non-oriented electrical steel (NOES) imported from Japan. The review specifically focuses on the sales conducted by Nippon Steel Corporation (NSC) during the period from December 1, 2023, to November 30, 2024. Summary of Findings Commerce preliminarily determined that NSC did not sell NOES at less than its normal value during this period. This means that NSC did not sell the steel in the U.S. at unfairly low prices. As a result, NSC’s weighted-average dumping margin for this period is 0.00 percent. This outcome suggests that NSC has complied with the rules and is not subject to additional antidumping duties. Background and Process The review was initiated on January 27, 2025, following requests in accordance with applicable regulations. Initially, Commerce aimed to complete its work by the end of 2025. However, due to a U.S. Federal Government shutdown and a backlog in processing documents, deadlines were extended. The review process included sending a detailed questionnaire to NSC and evaluating their responses. Methodology and Calculation The review used sections 772 and 773 of the Tariff Act of 1930 to calculate the constructed export price and normal value respectively. This ensures a fair comparison between the domestic price of steel in Japan and the price at which it was sold in the U.S. Next Steps Commerce will disclose its calculations to the parties involved and intends to verify the findings before the final results. Interested parties have the opportunity to comment on these preliminary results. They can submit case briefs within seven days after the last verification report and rebuttal briefs within five days after that. Potential Impact If the final results confirm the preliminary findings, NSC will not face extra tariffs on its steel exports to the United States for the reviewed period. Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection on how to assess entries of steel during this time, based on the final outcome. Upcoming Hearing and Comments Interested parties may request a hearing to discuss the issues further. Written requests must be submitted within 30 days from the notice’s publication date. Conclusion The preliminary results highlight the ongoing commitment of the U.S. Department of Commerce to maintain fair trading practices and protect domestic industries from unfairly priced foreign imports. Stakeholders are encouraged to participate in the review process to ensure robust trade policies continue. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Raw Honey From Argentina: Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2023-2024
U.S. Department of Commerce Finalizes Antidumping Review on Raw Honey from Argentina Estimated reading time: 4–6 minutes The U.S. Department of Commerce has announced the final results of its administrative review concerning antidumping duties on raw honey from Argentina. This process took place for the period starting June 1, 2023, and ending May 31, 2024. In this review, the Commerce Department discovered that some exporters were selling raw honey to the U.S. at prices lower than the normal value. This practice is known as “dumping,” and it can hurt U.S. producers by driving down prices unfairly. The enforcement of these results is part of Commerce’s effort to ensure fair competition. The review named specific Argentine companies, like ACA (Asociación De Cooperativas Argentinas Cooperativa Limitada) and NEXCO S.A., which were individually examined. ACA was found to have a dumping margin of 21.35%, while NEXCO had a margin of 0.00%, meaning no dumping was detected for NEXCO. For other companies that were not individually examined but still fall under this order, a weighted-average dumping margin of 21.35% has been determined. This margin is based on ACA’s calculated rate, consistent with the approach outlined in section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act. This section advises using the average rate of the companies investigated unless results are zero or based entirely on facts available. The process also encountered delays due to a federal government shutdown. This interruption extended timelines for case briefs and final analysis, ensuring a comprehensive review despite the challenges. Assessment rates will be calculated and instructed for all entries covered by this review. Certain entries by ACA and NEXCO will have specific rates or be liquidated at previous “all others” rates if neither firm knew the merchandise was U.S.-bound. These duties will be collected to adjust past and future consistency in pricing. Importers should note that cash deposit requirements following this review now reflect the updated rates. These deposits are required to ensure that any future dumping detected is offset. This measure continues the Department of Commerce’s efforts to protect U.S. industries from the adverse effects of unfair trade practices, such as dumping. The final results and actions are parts of a continuous process to provide a level playing field for domestic producers of raw honey and other goods. This notice confirms the compliance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Trade Act. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Raw Honey From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2023-2024
Page Not Found on GovInfo: A Guide to Resolving the Issue Estimated reading time: 1–2 minutes An error has occurred. The page you requested on the GovInfo website cannot be found. This issue is commonly referred to as a “Page Not Found” error. It means the web address or URL you tried to visit does not exist on the server. Steps to Report This Error: Contact Support: Please report this error to the GovInfo Support Team. You can contact them through the provided askGPO link. Provide Necessary Information: To help resolve the problem, provide the following details: The URL or web address you attempted to access. The steps you followed before encountering this error. Any specific search or browsing terms you used. A screenshot of the page where the error occurred. Additional Guidance: Help and Support: If you need further assistance, please visit the Help page for search tips and other resources. Return to Homepage: You can return to the GovInfo Homepage to continue browsing. Feedback and Contact: Submit feedback or contact GovInfo through their Contact page for any other inquiries or support needs. Your patience is appreciated while they work to resolve this issue. Thank you for aiding in improving the efficiency and accessibility of the GovInfo platform. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review and Intent To Rescind Review, in Part; 2023
Error: Page Not Found on GovInfo Estimated reading time: 1 minute On March 1, 2022, an error message was reported on the GovInfo website indicating that a page could not be found. This error affects users trying to access information on the site. Details of the Error The error message is clear: “Error occurred. The page you requested cannot be found.” Users are advised to report the error to askGPO. They are encouraged to provide the URL of the page they attempted to visit, describe the steps that led to the error, and include any specific search or browse terms. A screenshot of the error page is also suggested to assist in resolving the issue. Resolution Efforts Users are directed to visit the askGPO page to report the error. The GovInfo team requests that users provide as much detail as possible. This includes the steps taken when the error occurred and the page’s URL. Such details will help the team fix the problem quickly. Contact and Further Information For further assistance, users can visit the homepage of GovInfo. Additional resources for searching and finding information are available through links provided on the site. Conclusion This error highlights the importance of user feedback in maintaining the functionality of government information websites. By reporting errors, users help ensure that the site remains a reliable source of government information. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain GPU Computing Systems, Data Processing Unit (DPU) Technologies, and Associated Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same; Notice of Institution of Investigation
U.S. International Trade Commission Starts New Investigation into GPU and DPU Technologies Estimated reading time: 2–4 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has announced the start of a new investigation. This investigation is about certain computing systems. It involves GPU and DPU technologies and their components. These are important parts used in many tech products today. The investigation began on June 9, 2026. It started because of a complaint filed on May 8, 2026. Xockets, Inc., a company from Temple, Texas, made this complaint. They believe there is an unfair trade practice happening. They say some companies have violated section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. This law is important because it helps control how and what we trade with other countries. The companies involved in this case are NVIDIA Corporation, Microsoft Corporation, Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon Web Services, Inc., and Annapurna Labs (U.S.), Inc. These companies are famous for making and selling tech products. Xockets, Inc. claims these companies are using some of their patents without permission. Patents are like special protections for inventions or new ideas. The patents in this case include U.S. Patents No. 10,223,297 and No. 9,378,161 among others. Xockets wants the USITC to stop these companies from importing and selling certain products in the United States. The products in question are described as “rack-scale GPU computing systems.” These systems use network switches and hardware acceleration. They help make computing faster and more efficient. The Commission will now look into these claims. They will check if there really is a violation. The investigation will also see if an industry is being harmed or about to be harmed by these actions. Responses from the companies mentioned are due within 20 days. They must tell their side of the story to the Commission. If they do not respond, it could lead to serious actions against them. This might include stopping them from importing some products into the United States. The USITC’s Office of Unfair Import Investigations will be involved too. They help ensure fair trade. Pathenia M. Proctor can be contacted for more details at (202) 205-2560. This is a significant step for Xockets, Inc. and a big case for the USITC. The result of this investigation could impact how GPU and DPU technologies are used and traded in the future. This is an ongoing story. We will update with more information as it becomes available. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet From Bahrain, Brazil, Croatia, Egypt, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Oman, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Taiwan, and Turkey; Notice of Commission Determination To Conduct Full Five-Year Reviews
United States International Trade Commission to Conduct Full Reviews on Aluminum Sheet Imports Estimated reading time: 2–3 minutes United States International Trade Commission to Conduct Full Reviews on Aluminum Sheet Imports The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) has announced an important decision regarding the future of aluminum imports. On June 5, 2026, the Commission stated it will carry out full reviews on the common alloy aluminum sheet (CAAS) imports. These reviews are essential to evaluate if ending the current trade duties on CAAS from specific countries would cause harm to the United States industry. Countries Affected The countries involved include Bahrain, Brazil, Croatia, Egypt, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Oman, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Taiwan, and Turkey. The Commission intends to investigate whether lifting countervailing and antidumping duty orders would lead to continued problems for U.S. businesses. Importance of the Reviews The purpose of these reviews is to consider the potential impact on U.S. industries if the orders are revoked. The orders are in place to protect domestic companies from unfair competition due to subsidized pricing and dumping practices by foreign producers. Contact Information for Further Details For additional information, contact Laurel Schwartz at the Office of Investigations, phone number 202-205-2398. More details are available on the Commission’s website and electronic docket at USITC.gov. Hearing-impaired persons can access information through the TDD terminal at 202-205-1810. Administrative Details The decision to proceed with full reviews is based on the Tariff Act of 1930. The respondent group response from Bahrain was adequate, convincing the Commission to review these imports thoroughly. For other countries, the response was inadequate, yet full reviews will still be conducted to ensure fairness and efficiency. This announcement was published with the authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930, under the Commission’s rules. By order of the Commission, it was issued on June 9, 2026, by Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission. Conclusion The full reviews are critical for ensuring that the U.S. maintains a fair trade environment for its domestic industries while assessing the impact of international trade practices. The findings will guide future decisions regarding trade duty orders on aluminum sheet imports from these countries. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Large Vertical Shaft Engines From China; Scheduling of Expedited Five-Year Reviews
Federal Register: Expedited Review of Large Vertical Shaft Engines from China Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes June 12, 2026 – The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) has announced an expedited review of antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders concerning large vertical shaft engines imported from China. The review process is informed by the Tariff Act of 1930. The goal is to determine if revoking these duties would likely lead to continued or renewed harm to the U.S. industry within a foreseeable future. On May 8, 2026, the Commission decided that responses from U.S. parties who are interested in these reviews were adequate. However, responses from Chinese parties were inadequate. Therefore, the USITC will conduct an expedited review instead of a full review. Key dates and procedural rules govern this review. A detailed staff report will be available on July 7, 2026, for those with access to the Administrative Protective Order service list. A public version will follow. All interested parties can submit written comments by July 14, 2026. These should not include new facts. Should the Department of Commerce take more time to finalize its own review, comments will be due three business days after their final results are issued. Comments with sensitive business information must follow rules set by the USITC. The Commission’s Handbook on Filing Procedures provides further guidance on these requirements. All documents filed must be served on other review parties, and a certificate of service is required for each filing. The review is classified as extraordinarily complicated. The Commission has extended the review period by up to 90 days. This action is within the Commission’s authority under the Tariff Act of 1930. For more information, contact Rachel Devenney at the USITC, or visit their website. By Order of the Commission Issued: June 10, 2026 Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission This summary provides a snapshot of the expedited review process, ensuring industry participants and the public are informed about the ongoing investigation and its timelines. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Publication of Cyber-Related Sanctions Regulations Web General License 2
Treasury Department Issues Web General License for Cyber-Related Sanctions Estimated reading time: 1–7 minutes On June 10, 2026, the Department of the Treasury published an important document in the Federal Register. The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has issued a new Web General License, known as GL 2. This license is part of the Cyber-Related Sanctions Regulations, under 31 CFR Part 578. The purpose of General License 2 is to allow certain transactions that are usually not allowed. These transactions involve Anco Water Supply Co. Ltd. and help with the treatment and distribution of drinking water. The license makes sure that even if there are sanctions, people can still have access to clean water. GL 2 was first issued on April 23, 2026. The license was published on OFAC’s website, which can be visited here: OFAC Website. The license has some rules. It allows transactions with Anco Water Supply Co. Ltd., but only if they help with drinking water. If Anco Water Supply Co. Ltd. owns 50% or more of another company, those transactions can also be allowed. However, it does not allow other kinds of transactions that are still blocked by the Cyber-Related Sanctions Regulations. If you want more information, you can contact OFAC’s Assistant Director for Regulatory Affairs at 202-622-4855 or visit their website for more details. The Director of OFAC, Bradley T. Smith, signed the document. This action shows that the Treasury Department is working to balance sanctions with important needs like clean water. This announcement is available in Volume 91, Number 111 of the Federal Register, as [FR Doc No: 2026-11592]. It was filed on June 9, 2026. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Publication of International Criminal Court-Related Sanctions Regulations Web General License 11
New Sanctions Regulations Announced by the Treasury Department Estimated reading time: 1–4 minutes The U.S. Department of the Treasury has published new regulations related to international sanctions. These regulations come from a department known as the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). These rules are part of the International Criminal Court-Related Sanctions Regulations. General License 11 Released A special rule was published called a “General License” or GL. This specific one is named General License 11 (GL 11). OFAC had released GL 11 online before now. This document allows certain actions that were previously not allowed under earlier sanctions rules. Important Dates to Know GL 11 was first made official on December 18, 2025. But, it was only valid for one month and ended on January 17, 2026. This means that any actions that were allowed by GL 11 had to be completed by that January date. Who is Affected? GL 11 is related to people named Gocha Lordkipanidze and Erdenebalsuren Damdin. It also affects companies where these people own at least 50% directly or indirectly. If you want to wind down deals with them, you could have done so through GL 11. But, any money paid had to go into special accounts in the U.S. Restrictions and Rules Even though GL 11 allowed some actions, it didn’t allow everything. Transactions with other blocked people outside of the ones mentioned were still prohibited unless separately allowed. Official Statement This new regulation and GL 11 were signed by Bradley T. Smith. Smith is the Director of the Office of Foreign Assets Control. For more information, people can check the OFAC website. The official document is publicly available for review and clarifies the rules. Conclusion The GL 11 provides a temporary rule to handle certain transactions that weren’t allowed before. However, it expired on January 17, 2026. Therefore, ongoing adherence to more permanent rules is necessary. All these updates can be found on the official government website. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Publication of Iran-Related Web General Licenses U and V
U.S. Treasury Publishes Iran-Related Licenses U and V Estimated reading time: 1–2 minutes The Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has issued two Iran-related general licenses. These licenses, known as GL U and GL V, were initially made available on OFAC’s website and are now being published in the Federal Register. General License U: GL U was issued on March 20, 2026. This license allows certain transactions that were otherwise prohibited under multiple regulations and executive orders. It mainly authorizes the delivery and sale of Iranian-origin crude oil and petroleum products which were loaded on vessels by March 20, 2026. These transactions include necessary activities like safe docking, crew safety, emergency repairs, and environmental measures. The oil and petroleum products can also be imported into the United States if it is part of these authorized transactions. However, this license does not allow transactions with certain prohibited regions or persons described by other U.S. sanctions. GL U expired on April 19, 2026. General License V: GL V was issued on April 24, 2026. It allows the wind down of transactions related to Hengli Petrochemical (Dalian) Refinery Co., Ltd., or any entity where this company holds a 50 percent or larger interest. This license makes sure that any payments to blocked persons go into a blocked, interest-bearing account in the United States. This license does not cover transactions with any other blocked persons outside of those specifically mentioned. GL V expired on May 24, 2026. The publication of these licenses ensures transparency and provides detailed guidelines for those involved in allowed transactions under OFAC’s regulations. More information can be found on OFAC’s official website. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Publication of Venezuela Sanctions Regulations Web General Licenses 5U and 5V
New General Licenses Issued for Venezuela Sanctions Regulations Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes Dates of the Licenses GL 5U was issued on February 2, 2026. This license replaced an older license, GL 5T. Then, on March 19, 2026, OFAC issued GL 5V. This new license, GL 5V, replaced GL 5U. Both licenses are available on the OFAC website. Purpose of the Licenses The licenses allow certain dealings with the Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A. 2020 8.5 Percent Bond. These dealings were restricted by an executive order in 2018, which became part of the Venezuela Sanctions Regulations. License GL 5U Details Starting from March 20, 2026, GL 5U allows all transactions, financing, and other dealings with the Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A. 2020 8.5 Percent Bond. It replaces GL 5T completely. However, it does not allow actions that are prohibited by other parts of the Venezuela Sanctions Regulations. License GL 5V Details Effective from May 5, 2026, GL 5V authorizes similar transactions as GL 5U. It also involves the Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A. 2020 8.5 Percent Bond. Like GL 5U, it does not permit activities otherwise banned by the Venezuela Sanctions Regulations. People looking for more information or needing assistance can contact the OFAC office directly. Full details can also be accessed on OFAC’s website. Source This information is from the Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 111 (Wednesday, June 10, 2026). For more official details, visit the OFAC website. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Publication of Venezuela Sanctions Regulations Web General Licenses 48A and 49A
U.S. Department of Treasury Announces Updates to Venezuela Sanctions Regulations Estimated reading time: 3 minutes The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has published new general licenses connected to the Venezuela Sanctions Regulations. These licenses are numbered 48A and 49A. They were first issued on March 13, 2026, and were made available on OFAC’s website. General License No. 48A This license allows certain dealings that were blocked by the Venezuela Sanctions Regulations. These transactions involve specific items and services provided to Venezuela. The activities include providing goods, technology, software, or services for oil, gas, or petrochemical exploration and production. It also includes the generation and distribution of electricity in Venezuela. Companies must ensure that any contracts with the Government of Venezuela or Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A. (PdVSA) have U.S. laws governing them. Disputes need to be resolved in the United States. Payments for these transactions, except for local taxes, must go into a specified account according to Executive Order 14373. General License No. 49A This license allows the negotiation and creation of new contracts for investment in Venezuela. These are specifically for oil, gas, petrochemical, or electricity sectors. However, these contracts must be contingent. This means that actual work cannot start unless OFAC gives further approval. Restrictions Both licenses have specific conditions and restrictions. They do not allow payment in digital currency issued by the Venezuelan government. They also do not permit transactions with any individuals or entities associated with countries like Russia, Iran, or North Korea. Additionally, any new joint business formations in Venezuela need separate permissions. Reporting Requirements Companies involved must report to OFAC within ten days after a transaction. They will need to provide details about the parties and the nature of transactions. This includes the items involved and any payments to the Venezuelan Government. Bradley T. Smith, Director of the Office of Foreign Assets Control, issued these regulations on March 13, 2026. For more information, licenses and updates are available on the Department of Treasury’s website under OFAC sections. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain Oil Vaporizing Devices, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same; Notice of Institution of Formal Enforcement Proceeding
U.S. International Trade Commission Launches New Investigation Estimated reading time: 2–4 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has started a new investigation. This investigation is about certain oil vaporizing devices and their components. These products are involved in an ongoing case. The investigation, called “Investigation No. 337-TA-1392,” is under the enforcement section. It focuses on companies named STIIIZY and ALD. These companies may not have followed previous orders that told them to stop certain actions. These orders were made on January 20, 2026. In March 2024, a company called PAX Labs, Inc. filed a complaint. They said that STIIIZY and ALD were infringing on their patents. These patents include U.S. Patent Nos. 11,369,756, 11,766,527, 11,369,757, and 11,759,580. The complaint was about devices being imported and sold in the U.S. that violated these patents. PAX Labs also claimed that STIIIZY and ALD were hurting a domestic industry. In January 2026, the USITC found that these companies violated the law. They issued orders to stop their actions and included a 100% bond requirement. On May 19, 2026, PAX filed another complaint. They said STIIIZY and ALD are still importing and selling these products. They asked for another enforcement proceeding. The USITC agreed that this request meets all requirements. The commission has assigned a Chief Administrative Law Judge to handle this case. They will look into whether the companies violated any orders. Then, they will decide on the necessary enforcement actions. The authority for these actions comes from section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The USITC’s rules also provide guidance. The commission’s vote for this decision took place on June 5, 2026. Lisa Barton, the Secretary of the Commission, is responsible for this order. The Federal Register will publish the full notice, including the related orders. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain Smart Devices; Notice of Institution of Investigation
US International Trade Commission Investigates Smart Devices Patent Infringement Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission has announced an investigation into certain smart devices. This follows a complaint filed on May 6, 2026, by Cerence Operating Company from Burlington, Massachusetts. The complaint alleges infringement of certain patents. The complaint cites the importation and sale of smart devices infringing on U.S. Patent No. 8,306,815; U.S. Patent No. 9,203,972; U.S. Patent No. 8,320,575; U.S. Patent No. 11,929,073; and U.S. Patent No. 8,355,484. It claims violations of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The investigation’s focus is on smart speakers, smart displays, smart televisions, tablets, and smart streaming devices. Cerence Operating Company asserts these products infringe specific patent claims. It also states there is a related industry in the United States. The complaint seeks a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders. The U.S. International Trade Commission has designated a Chief Administrative Law Judge to oversee the investigation. Named respondents are Amazon.com, Inc. and Amazon.com Services, LLC, both based in Seattle, Washington. They are alleged to have violated Section 337. Responses to the complaint must be submitted within 20 days of service. Failure to respond may result in a waiver of the right to contest the allegations. It could also lead to an exclusion order or a cease and desist order against the respondents. For more information, the complaint and investigation notice are available electronically. Concerns or questions can be directed to the U.S. International Trade Commission. The U.S. International Trade Commission’s action is authorized by Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The official investigation scope was ordered on June 5, 2026. Secretary Lisa Barton issued the order of investigation. This is a significant development in the tech world as it involves major companies and could impact the U.S. market for smart devices. Various smart products fall under this investigation, potentially affecting consumers and manufacturers. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
High Purity Dissolving Pulp From Brazil and Norway; Scheduling of the Final Phase of Countervailing Duty and Antidumping Duty Investigations
USITC Announces Final Phase of Investigations on High Purity Dissolving Pulp from Brazil and Norway Estimated reading time: 3–4 minutes The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) has announced the final phase schedule for investigations concerning high purity dissolving pulp (HPDP) from Brazil and Norway. These investigations aim to determine if the U.S. industry is harmed or threatened by these imports. These investigations focus on both antidumping and countervailing duties. The Department of Commerce previously found that high purity dissolving pulp from Brazil and Norway is subsidized and sold at less-than-fair-value. The item in question falls under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States subheading 4702.00.00. High purity dissolving pulp is defined as having an alpha cellulose percentage of 90 percent or higher. The product must also have a brightness level of 90 percent or above. This type of pulp can come from different sources, such as hardwoods, softwoods, or agricultural byproducts. The pulp may be shipped in various forms, including flakes, powder, granules, or sheets. However, some kinds of dissolving pulp are excluded from these investigations. For example, pulp with an intrinsic viscosity under 455 milliliters per gram is not included. Cotton linter pulp is also excluded if it consists of at least 90 percent cotton linters fibers. The investigations were requested by Rayonier Advanced Materials, Inc., along with the United Steelworkers Union. They filed petitions on August 12, 2025. The investigations will follow the rules set out in the Tariff Act of 1930. For more information, parties can contact Julie Duffy at the USITC or access the public record through the USITC’s electronic docket system, EDIS. Participation in the investigations and appearing at the hearing require an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission. The hearing in this case is scheduled for October 8, 2026. Detailed rules govern written submissions, staff reports, and the handling of business proprietary information. The final date for post-hearing briefs is October 15, 2026. All written submissions must meet specific requirements as outlined in the Commission’s rules. The investigation is conducted under the authority of Title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930. The notice was published by Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission, and is available in Volume 91, Issue 111 of the Federal Register. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Corrosion Inhibitors From China; Scheduling of Expedited Five-Year Reviews
Federal Register Notice: Expedited Reviews on Corrosion Inhibitors from China Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes On June 10, 2026, the United States International Trade Commission (USITC) announced a new schedule for reviewing certain trade measures. These reviews are about corrosion inhibitors from China. The Commission wants to know if stopping current duties will harm U.S. industries. These reviews are called “expedited” because the Commission believes they can be completed quickly. This decision is based on a certain trade law called the Tariff Act of 1930. The focus is on whether removing current duties will lead to more harm or injury to U.S. businesses. The dates to remember are important. The USITC made a key decision on May 8, 2026. The team looked at responses from parties involved and found some responses were “adequate” and others were not. Because of this, the Commission decided a faster review was best. The information for these reviews is gathered by experts and will be shared. The staff report is a key document that will be available by June 30, 2026. This report will have important details about the corrosion inhibitors issue. People involved can see this on a special list. Comments are welcome. Parties who are allowed to give their opinions must submit them by July 7, 2026. These comments help the Commission decide what to do. However, comments can’t have new facts if someone is just submitting a statement. If the Department of Commerce needs more time, there might be a new deadline. There are rules for how to submit these documents. People must serve each document to all other parties involved in the reviews. And each submission needs a certificate of service to be accepted. The Commission has also decided that these reviews are a bit complex. They have the option to take more time, up to 90 days, if needed. The authority for these tasks comes from the Tariff Act of 1930. This notice was officially published in the Federal Register. Lisa Barton, the Secretary to the Commission, issued the order on June 8, 2026. The reference for this is [FR Doc. 2026-11622] filed on June 9, 2026, at 8:45 am. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain Pre-Stretched Synthetic Braiding Hair and Packaging Therefor; Notice of Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting Unopposed Motion To Amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation
U.S. International Trade Commission Updates on Synthetic Braiding Hair Case Estimated reading time: 4–6 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) announced on June 10, 2026, a decision regarding a case about synthetic braiding hair. On September 9, 2024, JBS Hair from Atlanta, GA filed a complaint. They said that some companies were infringing on their patents. These patents are for pre-stretched synthetic braiding hair and their packaging in the U.S. Vivace, Inc., doing business as Dae Do Inc., was one of the companies named in the complaint. The USITC found Vivace in default on February 24, 2025. This means Vivace did not respond to the complaint. Because of this, the USITC issued orders to stop Vivace and other default companies from importing certain products. This decision was made on September 29, 2025. After some time, JBS Hair filed another complaint against Vivace on December 18, 2025. They asked the USITC to start a new investigation. The USITC agreed and started this on January 22, 2026. Later, JBS Hair asked to change the name in their complaint. They wanted to change it from “Vivace, Inc. d/b/a Dae Do Inc.” to “Dae Do Inc. d/b/a Vivace.” The USITC agreed to this change on May 7, 2026. On June 8, 2026, the USITC decided not to review this change again. This means the name change is final. This case is under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The USITC uses this rule to protect U.S. industries from unfair trade practices. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain Pre-Stretched Synthetic Braiding Hair and Packaging Thereof (II); Notice of Request for Submissions on the Public Interest
U.S. International Trade Commission Investigates Pre-Stretched Synthetic Braiding Hair Estimated reading time: 3 minutes Date: 2026-06-10 The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) is conducting an investigation into certain pre-stretched synthetic braiding hair and its packaging. This comes after a ruling by the presiding administrative law judge. The judge issued an Initial Determination on the violation of Section 337. This section concerns unfair practices in import trade, particularly involving intellectual property rights. The USITC is now seeking public input. The public’s opinion is important in determining whether certain products should be banned from entering the United States. This includes considering the effects on public health, the economy, and consumers. Specifically, they are looking at imports by companies like Sun Taiyang Co., Ltd. (Outre), Beauty Elements Corporation (Bijouz), and several others. In addition, the Commission is looking at issuing a cease-and-desist order. This order targets Hair Zone, Inc. The aim is to stop them from selling the products involved after they have been imported. The public and government agencies can submit their comments until July 7, 2026. Submissions should discuss how the recommended remedial orders might affect the U.S. public. The Commission wants to know how the products subject to these orders are used in the U.S. Also, they are interested in public health concerns related to the orders. Furthermore, they seek details on similar products made in the U.S. that could replace the ones in question. They also want to know if these U.S. made products are readily available. The Commission emphasizes the importance of filing comments on time. People can file their comments electronically. They should mention the investigation number, 337-TA-1457, prominently. Questions about the filing process can be directed to the USITC Secretary. The investigation is under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The Commission aims to protect U.S. consumers, businesses, and public interests in this process. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From Thailand: Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Determination of No Shipments; 2023-2024
Changes Made to Antidumping Duty Review on Thai Shrimp Exports Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes Date: 2026-06-08 The United States Department of Commerce has updated the results of its review on antidumping duties for certain frozen shrimp exported from Thailand. These changes come after errors were found and corrected. The review covers a time period from February 1, 2023, to January 31, 2024. The review looked at whether shrimp from Thailand was sold at unfairly low prices in the United States. Companies must pay extra fees if they are found to be selling products below a fair price. Thai Union Group, one of the companies involved, pointed out mistakes that were affecting their final duty rates. These mistakes included errors in calculating specific rates for importers and in assigning costs. The American Shrimp Producers Association responded by saying Commerce usually sets its own costs for control numbers or sales. After looking into these concerns, the Department of Commerce changed the calculations to fix the errors. As a result, Thai Union’s dumping margin, which is a measure of how much they sold below fair value, is now set at 1.24 percent. This is a reduction from the earlier number of 2.01 percent. Other companies not individually reviewed also receive this new rate. Charoen Pokphand Foods, another company involved, was given a higher duty rate due to adverse facts available (AFA). This means they did not cooperate fully in the review. The duty rate for them changed from 17.38 percent to 26.66 percent after the corrections. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection is responsible for collecting these duties from applicable entries. Items will be assessed using the amended results starting from February 20, 2026. Companies like Phatthana Frozen Food and Thai Union Manufacturing were found not to have shipped any shrimp to the U.S. during this review period. If an importer’s margin is too low, meaning less than 0.5 percent, they do not have to pay extra duties. The rate for all companies not included in this specific review will remain at 5.34 percent, as given by a previous decision. This rate is for situations where there are no individual company rates. The new rules are applied to shipments entering the U.S. after February 20, 2026. These changes make sure that shrimp imported from Thailand are sold at fair prices and protect American shrimp producers from unfair competition. The stakeholders are reminded of their duty to follow the rules mentioned in the Administrative Protective Order. The Department of Commerce will also notify importers of these cash deposit requirements. These updates help ensure fair trade and protect U.S. businesses. The full details of the corrections and how they affect duties are available through the Department of Commerce and related publications. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Finished Carbon Steel Flanges From India: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2023
Federal Register: Final Review of Subsidies on Steel Flanges from India Estimated reading time: 2–3 minutes Background Information The U.S. Department of Commerce’s International Trade Administration has announced the final results of its Countervailing Duty Administrative Review on finished carbon steel flanges from India. This review covered the period from January 1, 2023, to December 31, 2023. The review began with preliminary results, which were shared on February 3, 2026. These results invited comments from interested parties. The review period looked at subsidies provided to producers and exporters of steel flanges from India. A document detailing all related issues and decisions is available online. Scope of the Order The review focused on finished carbon steel flanges imported from India. This is part of a countervailing duty order that has been in place to address subsidies that Indian companies might receive, which can affect fair trade. Findings and Methodology The review adhered to procedures set out by the Tariff Act of 1930. Countervailable subsidies are those where government financial support leads to specific benefits for producers and exporters. The review confirmed that Norma (India) Ltd. and R.N. Gupta & Co. Ltd., along with other companies, received such subsidies. Final Results Norma (India) Ltd. and its associated entities retained a subsidy rate of 2.40%. R.N. Gupta & Co. Ltd. received a subsidy rate of 2.27%. Non-examined companies were assigned a rate of 2.32%, based on the weighted average of the examined companies. Assessment and Cash Deposits The U.S. Department of Commerce will direct Customs and Border Protection to assess duties on relevant imports. New cash deposit rates will be applied to shipments entering the U.S. These rates will reflect the subsidy rates from the review, unless they are below a minimal threshold. Conclusion The review ensures that actions taken are consistent with trade laws, maintaining fair competition by countering the effects of foreign government subsidies. This is intended to protect U.S. industry and workers from unfair trade practices. For more information, parties are encouraged to consult the official documents available online. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Chromium Trioxide From India and Turkey; Scheduling of the Final Phase of Countervailing Duty and Antidumping Duty Investigations
USITC Announces Final Phase of Trade Investigations on Chromium Trioxide Imports Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) has announced the scheduling of the final phase of antidumping and countervailing duty investigations. This involves case numbers 701-TA-779 and 731-TA-1765-1766, focusing on chromium trioxide imports from India and Turkey. The Commission aims to determine if these imports are harming the US industry. This investigation is under the Tariff Act of 1930. Chromium trioxide is an inorganic compound with the chemical formula CrO3. It is often referred to as chromic acid in solution form. The investigations cover all forms of this chemical, whether solid or in solution form. The Department of Commerce initially found that manufacturers from India might be subsidizing these products. It also noted that products from both India and Turkey are sold in the US at less-than-fair-value. The investigations began after American Chrome & Chemicals, Inc., based in Pennsylvania, filed petitions in September 2025. The USITC will hold a hearing in Washington, D.C. on August 6, 2026. The prehearing staff report will be released on July 24, 2026. Interested parties should attend the prehearing conference, if necessary, on August 4, 2026. Parties must file written testimony and presentation slides by August 5, 2026. Prehearing briefs are due by July 31, 2026, and posthearing briefs by August 13, 2026. All filings must be made electronically through the Commission’s system at edis.usitc.gov. No paper filings will be accepted during this time. Individuals with questions should contact Laurel Schwartz at the Office of Investigations or visit usitc.gov for more information. The public can view records on the Commission’s electronic docket at edis.usitc.gov. By order of the Commission, Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission, issued the notice on June 3, 2026. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain Clear Aligners and Components Thereof; Notice of a Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting In Part a Motion To Amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation
U.S. International Trade Commission Updates on Clear Aligners Investigation Estimated reading time: 1–7 minutes On June 8, 2026, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) announced a decision regarding an investigation about clear aligners. These aligners are devices used in orthodontics to straighten teeth. The investigation was started on December 29, 2025. Align Technology, Inc., a company from Tempe, Arizona, filed a complaint. They claimed that other companies sold clear aligners and parts made using their patented technologies. The patents in question are several U.S. Patents, including numbers `313, `314, `977, `616, and others. The companies being investigated are mainly from China. They include Angelalign Technology Inc. and Wuxi EA Medical Instruments, among others. There is also a company from Newark, Delaware involved. These companies are referred to as the Respondents. Align Technology sought to change its complaint. They wanted to add new claims of patent infringement. They also wanted to remove some original claims. On April 14, 2026, they filed a motion to make these changes. Respondents opposed this motion, saying Align had enough information when they first filed the complaint. On May 11, 2026, the Respondents filed a petition. They challenged the ITC’s decision that allowed Align to amend its complaint. Align filed a response on May 18, 2026. After reviewing all documents and submissions, the ITC decided not to review the decision further. This decision means that the investigation will continue with the new claims added. These include claims 24 from patent `313 and claim 28 from patent `314, among others. The ITC made this determination on June 3, 2026. They stated that these changes would make future processes more efficient. The investigation is governed by section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 and related Rules of Practice. The ITC provided the authority for these actions, ensuring the investigation proceeds smoothly. They emphasized that this process aims to use resources wisely and maintain fairness. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Crepe Paper From China; Scheduling of an Expedited Five-Year Review
International Trade Commission Announces Expedited Review on Crepe Paper from China Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) has announced the scheduling of an expedited review. This review will determine if revoking the antidumping duty on crepe paper imported from China would lead to material harm again in the future. The USITC decided to conduct this review based on responses received by May 8, 2026. The domestic party response was adequate, but the response from the respondent party was not adequate. An expedited review is being conducted under the Tariff Act of 1930, specifically section 751(c)(3). The review aims to decide if material harm would occur if the antidumping duty is revoked. The staff report regarding this review will be available on June 10, 2026, for those under the Administrative Protective Order service list. A public version will be released later. Comments from interested parties in the review are due by June 17, 2026. These comments cannot contain new information. If the Department of Commerce extends its review, new deadlines for comments might be set. The USITC has stated this review is extraordinarily complicated. They may extend the review period by up to 90 days. Authority for this review falls under Title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930. All documents must include a certificate of service. Issued on June 3, 2026, by order of Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain Women’s Flats With Colored Outsoles Thereof; Notice of the Commission’s Final Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337: Issuance of a General Exclusion Order and a Limited Exclusion Order; Termination of the Investigation
US International Trade Commission Issues Orders on Women’s Flats Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) has made a final decision in its investigation of certain women’s flats with colored outsoles. This decision is based on a violation of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The ITC found that certain products were infringing on multiple U.S. patents. The investigation began on December 18, 2024. Gavrieli Brands LLC of California filed a complaint. The complaint focused on several U.S. patents. These include D681,928, D844,951, D681,927, D686,812, and D688,853. The patents describe women’s flats with colored outsoles. The investigation named several respondents. These include companies from New York, the Philippines, and China. None of these companies responded to the charges. This led the ITC to find them in default. On July 23, 2025, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found a violation of Section 337. The judge noted that some products were infringing various patent claims. The ALJ also recommended a General Exclusion Order (GEO) and a Limited Exclusion Order (LEO). On September 8, 2025, the ITC reviewed the judge’s findings. They agreed with most of the findings. They issued a GEO to prohibit the import of infringing products. They also issued an LEO against specific companies. The ITC set a bond of 100% for the value of the products during a review period. This ensures compliance with the orders. The investigation is now officially closed. The decision emphasizes the importance of respecting patent rights in trade. The ITC’s actions are to protect U.S. businesses and innovation. The Commission’s vote on the matter took place on June 3, 2026, and the orders were issued by Lisa Barton, the Secretary to the Commission. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Certain Pickleball Paddles; Notice of Institution of Investigation
U.S. International Trade Commission Starts Investigation on Pickleball Paddles Estimated reading time: 2–4 minutes Complaint Filed The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) has announced a new investigation. This started with a complaint filed on April 7, 2026. The complaint came from Sport Squad, Inc., also known as JOOLA, located in North Bethesda, Maryland. Allegations Made Sport Squad’s complaint is about pickleball paddles. They believe some companies are importing these paddles into the United States incorrectly. They say these paddles infringe on two of their patents. These patents are numbered 12,465,826 and 12,357,891. Sport Squad says that the paddles being imported use their patented technology without permission. This goes against section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. They have requested the ITC to start an investigation. They want to find out if these companies have broken the law. Companies Involved Many companies are named in this investigation. They include Franklin Sports, Inc., Proton Sports, Inc., Vegas Pickleball LLC, Engage Pickleball, LLC, and many others. These companies are located in various states including Massachusetts, Arizona, and Florida. What Sport Squad Wants Sport Squad wants the ITC to take serious action. They have asked for a limited exclusion order. This would stop the importation of these paddles. They also want cease and desist orders. This would make the companies stop the sale of these paddles in the United States. Important Dates The ITC has ordered an investigation as of June 4, 2026. The companies accused have 20 days to respond. They must follow the specific rules set by the ITC. If they do not respond in time, they might lose their chance to fight these claims. Conclusion This case is important for the pickleball industry in the United States. It involves patent rights and the legality of importing certain products. The ITC will now make decisions based on the investigation to see if the law was broken. For more details, all information about this case can be accessed on the ITC’s docket site. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.
Hand Trucks From China; Scheduling of an Expedited Five-Year Review
U.S. International Trade Commission Plans Expedited Review of Hand Trucks from China Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) has announced the scheduling of an expedited review. This review is about the antidumping duty order on hand trucks imported from China. The review aims to decide if stopping the antidumping duty order would cause harm to U.S. industries. This harm could happen again if the duty order is removed. The review process began on May 8, 2026. The USITC wants to check if the order is needed to protect U.S. industries. Alejandro Orozco is the contact person for more information. You can reach him at 202-205-3177. The commission also offers support for people who are hearing-impaired. They can use the TDD terminal at 202-205-1810. People with mobility issues can get help by contacting the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. The USITC has stated that this expedited review follows the Tariff Act of 1930. This acts as a guideline for how reviews are carried out. A background note says the domestic responses to an earlier notice were good. However, the responses from China were not adequate. The commission will carry out this review quickly. Commissioner David S. Johanson thinks a full review would be better, but the quicker review will still happen. Reports about the review will be in the nonpublic record by July 15, 2026. A public version will come out later. Written comments about the review can be sent by July 22, 2026. These comments should not have any new facts. Documents need to be served to all parties in the review. A certificate of service must also be filed. The review is said to be complicated. The USITC may extend the time period for up to 90 days. This is allowed under 19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(5)(B). All this information is found under Title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930. This notice was published on June 4, 2026, by Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission. The document number for this Federal Register notice is 2026-11465. It appeared on pages 34649-34650. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.


