Wood Mouldings and Millwork Products From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results Pursuant to Court Decision

Issuing agencies

Abstract

On September 23, 2026, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) issued its final judgment in China Cornici Co., Ltd., and RaoPing HongRong Handicrafts Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court Nos. 23-00216 and 23-00217, Slip Op. 26-118, sustaining the Department of Commerce (Commerce) first remand results pertaining to the administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on of wood mouldings and millwork products (millwork products) from the People's Republic of China (China) covering the period June 12, 2020, through December 31, 2021. Commerce is notifying the public that the CIT's final judgment is not in harmony with Commerce's final results of the administrative review, and that Commerce is amending the final results with respect to the rescission of the administrative review for China Cornici Co., Ltd. (China Cornici) and RaoPing HongRong Handicrafts Co., Ltd. (RaoPing) and the corresponding cash deposit rates assigned to these companies.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 198 (Thursday, October 15, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 198 (Thursday, October 15, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65523-65525]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-21038]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-570-118]


Wood Mouldings and Millwork Products From the People's Republic 
of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final 
Results Pursuant to Court Decision

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On September 23, 2026, the U.S. Court of International Trade 
(CIT) issued its final judgment in China Cornici Co., Ltd., and RaoPing 
HongRong Handicrafts Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court Nos. 23-00216 
and 23-00217, Slip Op. 26-118, sustaining the Department of Commerce 
(Commerce) first remand results pertaining to the administrative review 
of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on of wood mouldings and 
millwork products (millwork products) from the People's Republic of 
China (China) covering the period June 12, 2020, through December 31, 
2021. Commerce is notifying the public that the CIT's final judgment is 
not in harmony with

[[Page 65524]]

Commerce's final results of the administrative review, and that 
Commerce is amending the final results with respect to the rescission 
of the administrative review for China Cornici Co., Ltd. (China 
Cornici) and RaoPing HongRong Handicrafts Co., Ltd. (RaoPing) and the 
corresponding cash deposit rates assigned to these companies.

DATES: Applicable October 3, 2026.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brandon James, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office VIII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-7472.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On September 11, 2023, Commerce published its Final Results in the 
2020-2021 CVD administrative review of millwork products from China.\1\ 
In the underlying review, China Cornici and RaoPing each claimed they 
had a reviewable entry entitling them to review and provided certain 
documentation to support their claims.\2\ In the Final Results, 
Commerce recognized that China Cornici demonstrated its attempts to 
change with CBP the classification of its entry from Type 01, for which 
no CVD cash deposits were paid at the time of entry, to Type 03, and 
pay CVD duties owed, and that the process may have been ongoing.\3\ 
However, Commerce noted that statutory deadlines dictated Commerce's 
issuance of the Final Results \4\ and, at the time of issuance, no 
record evidence in the underlying review demonstrated that China 
Cornici had a suspended entry during the period of review (POR).\5\ 
Moreover, the information RaoPing provided did not demonstrate, and 
comments provided by RaoPing did not explain, how the evidence the 
company provided of a Type 03 entry was connected to RaoPing or how it 
corresponded to the CBP data on the record.\6\ Accordingly, in the 
Final Results, Commerce rescinded the administrative review with 
respect to China Cornici and RaoPing pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), 
because it found that the two companies had no suspended entries of 
subject merchandise during the POR.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Wood Mouldings and Millwork Products from the People's 
Republic of China: Final Results and Partial Recission of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2020-2021, 88 FR 62319 
(September 11, 2023) (Final Results), and accompanying Issues and 
Decision Memorandum (IDM).
    \2\ See Final Results IDM at 36.
    \3\ Id. at 37.
    \4\ See section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act).
    \5\ See Final Results IDM at 37.
    \6\ Id.
    \7\ See Final Results IDM at 38.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    China Cornici and RaoPing appealed Commerce's Final Results to the 
CIT. On September 5, 2025, the CIT remanded the Final Results, 
directing Commerce to reconsider its determination to rescind the 
reviews for China Cornici and RaoPing and to consider under what 
circumstances and how to adjust its proceedings when prior disclosures 
and deposits of duties are made to remedy mistakes on entry papers, 
addressing all the statutes at play, not just unfair trade statutes and 
preferred practices.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See China Cornici Co., Ltd., and RaoPing HongRong 
Handicrafts Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court Nos. 23-00216 and 23-
00217, Slip Op. 25-118 (CIT September 5, 2025) (Remand Order) at 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On remand, Commerce solicited information from China Cornici, 
RaoPing, and CBP which corroborated the companies' claims about their 
entries.\9\ Accordingly, Commerce determined not to rescind the reviews 
for China Cornici and RaoPing and to assign them applicable cash 
deposit rates.\10\ However, Commerce acknowledged that it lacks the 
authority to reliquidate entries. As such, Commerce declined to issue 
assessment instructions.\11\ On September 23, 2026, the CIT sustained 
Commerce's Final Remand Redetermination.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See generally, Final Results of Remand Redetermination, 
China Cornici Co., Ltd., and RaoPing HongRong Handicrafts Co., Ltd. 
v. United States, Court Nos. 23-00216 and 23-00217, Slip Op. 25-118 
(CIT 2025), dated May 1, 20226 (Final Remand Redetermination).
    \10\ Id. at 6-12.
    \11\ Id.
    \12\ See China Cornici Co., Ltd., and RaoPing HongRong 
Handicrafts Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court Nos. 23-00216 and 23-
00217, Slip Op. 26-118 (CIT September 23, 2026) (CIT Opinion).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken,\13\ as clarified by Diamond 
Sawblades,\14\ the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held 
that, pursuant to section 516A(c) and (e) of the Act, Commerce must 
publish a notice of court decision that is not ``in harmony'' with a 
Commerce determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending 
a ``conclusive'' court decision. The CIT's September 23, 2026, judgment 
constitutes a final decision of the CIT that is not in harmony with 
Commerce's Final Results. Thus, this notice is published in fulfillment 
of the publication requirements of Timken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 
1990) (Timken).
    \14\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition v. United 
States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amended Final Results

    In accordance with the CIT's September 23, 2026, final judgment, 
Commerce is amending its Final Results and finds that China Cornici and 
RaoPing are subject to the 2020-2021 administrative review. As a 
result, we are assigning to China Cornici and RaoPing the following 
cash deposit rate assigned to non-selected companies subject to the 
review: \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Final Results, 88 FR at 62321.
    \16\ Consistent with Commerce practice, the assigned cash 
deposit rate in the first administrative review is the most recent 
rate calculated, i.e., the subsidy rate calculated for the period 
January 1, 2021, through December 31, 2021.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Cash deposit
                                                             rate \16\
                    Producer/exporter                       (percent ad
                                                             valorem)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
China Cornici Co., Ltd..................................            8.89
RaoPing HongRong Handicrafts Co., Ltd...................            8.89
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 
that, pending any appeals, the cash deposit rates for the companies 
will be the rates listed above.

Liquidation of Suspended Entries

    In the event the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or, if appealed, 
upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce normally 
instructs CBP to liquidate relevant entries at the assessed rates and 
to lift suspension of liquidation of such entries. However, in its 
final judgment, the CIT affirmed that Commerce lacks the authority to 
reliquidate the POR entries because those entries had already been 
liquidated \17\ and, therefore, sustained Commerce's determination to 
not issue assessment instructions to CBP to assess countervailing 
duties on China Cornici's and RaoPing's POR entries.\18\ Accordingly, 
to the extent that entries produced and/or exported by China Cornici 
and RaoPing for the period June 12, 2020, through December 31, 2021, 
have already been liquidated, Commerce lacks the administrative 
authority to reliquidate those entries.\19\ Therefore, in the event 
that the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or is upheld on appeal, Commerce 
will not issue assessment instructions to CBP instructing CBP to assess 
countervailing

[[Page 65525]]

duties on China Cornici's and RaoPing's entries of subject merchandise 
for the period June 12, 2020, through December 31, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See CIT Opinion at 15.
    \18\ Id.
    \19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 
516A(c) and (e) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: October 9, 2026.
Scot Fullerton,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2026-21038 Filed 10-14-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P


</pre></body>
</html>