Lined Paper Products. The International Trade Administration has rescinded its administrative review of the antidumping duty order on lined paper products from India for the period Sept. 1, 2013, through Aug. 31, 2014, with respect to three companies (Marisa International, Pioneer Stationery Private Limited and Super Impex) for which review requests were timely withdrawn. AD duties on entries of subject merchandise from these companies will be assessed at the AD cash deposit rates required at the time of entry or withdrawal from warehouse for consumption.
Solar Cells. The ITA has initiated a changed circumstances review of the AD duty order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules, from China. This review will determine whether Neo Solar Power corporation is the successor-in-interest to DelSolar Co. Ltd. and thus entitled to its AD duty rate. The ITA states that it generally considers the new company to be the successor to the predecessor if the resulting operations are essentially the same.
Magnesium Metal. The ITA has issued the final results of its administrative review of the AD duty order on magnesium metal from China for the period April 1, 2013, through March 31, 2014. The ITA found that neither Tianjin Magnesium International Co. Ltd. nor Tianjin Magnesium Metal Co. Ltd. had reviewable entries of subject merchandise during this period. AD cash deposit rates for subject merchandise from these two companies will therefore remain unchanged.
Polyester Staple Fiber. In its administrative review of the AD duty order on polyester staple fiber from Taiwan for the period May 1, 2013, through April 3, 2014, the ITA has preliminarily found that Far Eastern New Century Corporation has not sold subject merchandise at less than normal value and Nan Ya Plastics Corporation had no shipments during this period.
Matchbooks. In its sunset reviews of the AD and CV duty orders on commodity matchbooks from India, the International Trade Commission has determined that revoking these orders would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. As a result, these orders will be continued for five years.