The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently reversed both the Department of Commerce's (Commerce) scope decision involving certain steel threaded rod from China and the Court of International Trade's affirmance of Commerce's decision. A.L. Patterson v. United States, Ct. No. 13-1526 (September 22, 2014). This is the second recent scope decision in which the Federal Circuit has reversed a Commerce scope decision and a CIT affirmance of that decision. See Fedmet Resources v. United States, Ct. No. 13-1539 (June 20, 2014). In the Patterson case, the Federal Circuit found that merely because an imported product is "facially covered by the literal language of the order," the imported product "may still be outside the scope if the order can reasonably be interpreted so as to exclude it." Slip Op. at 10 (emphasis by the court). The Federal Circuit emphasized that Commerce was required to make findings on whether the imports at issue were "the kind of steel threaded rod sold in the domestic industry that the Commission investigated and found injury." Id. at 11. The Federal Circuit found that the International Trade Commission did not investigate the imported product at issue, despite the fact that the Commission was not a party to the litigation. Based on the absence of evidence of inclusion of the imported product in the underlying investigations, the Federal Circuit concluded that the imports were "other kinds of steel threaded rods" not covered by the antidumping order's scope.