You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Goss Graphics Systems, Inc. v. United States, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., and Man Roland Druckmaschinen Ag and Man Roland Inc., and Kba-Motter Corporation and Koenig & Bauer-Albert Ag, and Tokyo Kikai Seisakusho, Ltd. v. United States, and Goss Graphics Systems, Inc.

Citation: 216 F.3d 1357Docket: 99-1150

Court: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit; August 29, 2000; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case revolves around Goss Graphics Systems, Inc. and the United States, with Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. and other foreign manufacturers as appellants, concerning the import of large newspaper printing presses (LNPPs) from Japan and Germany. The International Trade Commission (ITC) found that these imports, sold at less than fair value, posed a threat of material injury to the U.S. domestic industry. The ITC's decision was based on cumulation of imports from both countries due to their overlapping competitive effects. The Court of International Trade upheld the ITC's determination, and the appellate court affirmed this ruling, confirming no legal error was made. The ITC's findings highlighted the vulnerability of the domestic industry to price suppression and competition, emphasizing the potential for material injury absent regulatory action. The case involved an assessment of various economic factors under U.S. trade law, requiring an evaluation of the threat posed by imminent imports. Ultimately, the court upheld the ITC's decision, affirming the cumulated threat of material injury from Japanese and German imports, with each party bearing its own costs.

Legal Issues Addressed

Antidumping Duties and Threat of Material Injury

Application: Antidumping duties apply if imports are sold at less than fair value and threaten material injury, with the ITC evaluating economic factors to determine the imminence of injury.

Reasoning: Regarding antidumping duties under Title 19, these are applicable if imports are sold at less than fair value (LTFV) and threaten to cause material injury to domestic industries.

Cumulation of Imports in Trade Injury Determination

Application: The ITC appropriately cumulated imports from Japan and Germany due to overlapping competitive effects in assessing the threat of material injury to the U.S. domestic industry.

Reasoning: The ITC's determination was based on the cumulation of imports from both countries, which it deemed appropriate due to their overlapping effects.

Factors in Assessing Material Injury Threat

Application: The ITC assessed a range of statutory factors including market share, price effects, and production capacity to determine the threat of material injury.

Reasoning: The ITC's analysis addressed statutory factors, concluding that importers could shift substantial production to the U.S., had increased market penetration, and their participation in bidding would likely suppress prices.

Standard of Review for ITC Determinations

Application: The Court of International Trade and the appellate court upheld the ITC's findings, confirming they were supported by substantial evidence and not legally deficient.

Reasoning: The appellate court affirmed this ruling, confirming that the ITC had not erred legally and that Goss Graphics, the largest LNPP supplier in the U.S., represented the domestic industry.

Threat of Material Injury under U.S. Trade Law

Application: The ITC determined that imminent imports posed a threat of material injury and highlighted potential price suppression and competition hindering technological advancement.

Reasoning: However, the ITC determined that these imports posed a threat of material injury, finding that further dumped or subsidized imports were imminent and that material injury would occur unless action was taken.