AK Steel Corporation, the United Steelworkers, and other manufacturers have submitted comments urging the U.S. International Trade Commission to reverse an administrative law judge’s dismissal of U.S. Steel’s antitrust claim against Chinese companies, saying the case is based on section 337 trade-remedy law which functions differently than broader antitrust laws because it is designed to protect U.S. industry rather than competition.
[Isabelle Hoagland] April 3rd, 2017 [Inside US Trade]
The submissions will help inform the Commission’s decision on whether to remand the claim back to Administrative Law Judge Dee Lord, with oral arguments slated to occur on April 20.
Industry groups filed responses to the March 3 ITC request for additional public comment on Lord’s decision to dismiss U.S. Steel’s antitrust claim against Chinese manufacturers, with many focusing on what they see as a misapplication of antitrust requirements.
“The wholesale lifting of antitrust laws specifically designed to protect the consumer into the Section 337 price-fixing trade remedy would effectively deny to the domestic industry and American workers access to a statute specifically enacted to protect them,” an industry source told Inside U.S. Trade.
“[The Commission] has never imposed such requirements upon another claim, nor should it now,” the source said.
The industry submissions elaborated on whether the antitrust claim meets the injury requirements under section 337 and also “invited interested government agencies” to weigh in on legal issues surrounding antitrust injuries. All written and responsive submissions were due April 3.