Two New Section 337 Complaints Target DRAM and Foundry Coke as CIT Sends Qatar Melamine Back to Commerce
The Court of International Trade has sent Commerce's negative antidumping determination on melamine from Qatar back for reconsideration, faulting the agency's explanation for using Turkey as the third-country comparison market. The same week, the USITC received two new Section 337 complaints, one on DRAM devices and one on foundry coke, and opened the public-interest comment window on each.
Three trade-enforcement files moved on separate tracks. In Cornerstone Chemical Co. v. United States (Court No. 25-00005, Slip Op. 26-64, June 17, 2026), the CIT sustained Commerce's negative dumping finding in part and remanded in part, faulting the agency for not addressing whether subsidized Chinese melamine disqualified Turkey as the comparison market. The two Section 337 complaints, DN 3915 on DRAM and DN 3914 on foundry coke, have not been instituted yet, and the Commission is taking public-interest comments before it decides whether to proceed.
The melamine remand is the clearest legal signal of the three, and it is not a preliminary-margin dispute. Commerce already issued a final negative antidumping determination in December 2024, which terminated the antidumping proceeding and left no antidumping cash-deposit or suspension-of-liquidation requirement. The domestic petitioner, Cornerstone, is the party seeking duties, while the Qatari producer and QatarEnergy intervened to defend the no-dumping result. The court did not order duties. It returned one issue to Commerce, whether a sales-based particular market situation in Turkey, allegedly driven by subsidized Chinese imports, disqualifies Turkey as a proxy market. If Commerce changes course on remand, the path runs toward constructed value or a different third country, not an automatic duty order.