Plywood importer InterGlobal Forest, which is seeking a rehearing of its case challenging CBP’s finding that it evaded antidumping and countervailing duties on plywood from China, said Jan. 2 that the government’s response to its motion for reconsideration (see 2512150042) “ignores” its “substantive arguments that the Government is required to complete the administrative record” and “fails to refute IGF’s argument that there has been a manifest injustice in this case” (American Pacific Plywood v. United States, CIT Consol. # 20-03914). …“The main problem with the Government and Court depicting the confession of judgment as a ‘settlement’ is that Richmond never wanted to settle and never agreed to the confession of judgment. …The importer also disagreed that it had failed to exhaust any argument that its products were out-of-scope because LB Wood never used three-ply plywood from China in its production processes.” [to access the full story a Trade Law Daily subscription is required]