Author:Barzilay, Judith M.

It is my pleasure this year to join my colleagues on the bench of the U.S. Court of International Trade ("CIT") who have previously introduced this worthy commentary on our yearly jurisprudence to our bar and other interested members of the legal community. The Court appreciates the hard work and many hours it took to research, write, edit and publish these fine articles.

When I joined the Justice Department's International Trade Field Office in 1984, I had little idea how important customs and trade law would be to my professional future. I quickly recognized, though, that something about this very specialized area of the law was extremely appealing. Despite the esoteric nature of the legal concepts with which our bar engages, their sweeping and material impact is readily apparent. In particular, I continue to take great pleasure in dealing with and learning about tangible products, from the wood flooring at issue in the first case I tried as a new Justice Department attorney to Russian nesting dolls, electronics and complex chemicals. To this day, as I continue to learn the intricacies of our field, I find that the application of conceptual legal principles to concrete business transactions is endlessly fascinating.

The articles in this volume demonstrate this interesting interplay by examining the spectrum of recent cases to come before the CIT and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ("CAFC"). In the trade remedies arena alone, namely those cases governed by 28 U.S.C. [section] 1581 (c) and increasingly arising under the Court's "residual jurisdiction" pursuant to 28 U.S.C. [section] 1581(i), our Court and the CAFC considered a number of important questions: Whose goods will be affected by antidumping and countervailing duty orders and the setting of those margins? What degree of evidence and analysis must the International Trade Commission produce to ensure that its injury determinations will pass muster upon judicial review? What will be the effective date of an agency redetermination implementing a World Trade Organization ruling adverse to U.S. practice? How should goods from a purported non-market economy be treated and can they be subject to both antidumping and countervailing duties? Our court addressed all these questions in 2010, and several are now on appeal at the CAFC. In addition, the issue of zeroing in antidumping investigations and reviews has resurfaced and our Court and the CAFC have issued several important...

To continue reading