Court of International Trade (CIT) Senior Judge Judith M. Barzilay affirmed the Commerce Department's anti-dumping duty review of a Turkish steel pipe shipper on June 25th. The defendant, Borusan AS, argued that Commerce failed to consider its explanation for why its sales patterns did not support a finding of targeted dumping. Judge Barzilay rejected Borusan's argument, finding that there is no provision in U.S. trade law or the accompanying statement of administrative action to support Borusan's position. Commerce not need consider intent or motivation during analyses of companies under scrutiny in these cases.

The case began when U.S. Steel Corp. requested Commerce conduct a review of Borusan's entries of standard pipe into the U.S. from May 1st, 2010 to April 30th, 2011. Commerce set a final dumping margin of 6.05 percent (later reduced to 3.55 percent), but Commerce continued to maintain that Borusan engaged in targeted dumping when their U.S. sales price for February 2010 was compared to other months in the review period, prompting the challenge from Borusan.

Commerce's use of targeted dumping examinations is contentious, prompting a dispute settlement panel at the World Trade Organization (WTO). The panel is reviewing the practice in the context of several anti-dumping cases related to Chinese products.