United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________

YC RUBBER CO. (NORTH AMERICA) LLC, SUTONG TIRE RESOURCES, INC., MAYRUN TYRE (HONG KONG) LIMITED, ITG VOMA CORPORATION, KENDA RUBBER (CHINA) CO., LTD., Plaintiffs-Appellants

v.

UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee ______________________

2021-1489, 2021-1698, 2021-1699, 2021-1700 ______________________

Appeals from the United States Court of International Trade in No. 1:19-cv-00069-MAB, Judge Mark A. Barnett. ______________________

Decided: August 29, 2022 ______________________

NICHOLAS SPARKS, Hogan Lovells US LLP, Washing- ton, DC, argued for plaintiffs-appellants ITG Voma Corpo- ration, Mayrun Tyre (Hong Kong) Limited, Sutong Tire Resources, Inc., YC Rubber Co. (North America) LLC. Plaintiff-appellant ITG Voma Corporation also repre- sented by CRAIG A. LEWIS, JONATHAN THOMAS STOEL.

NED H. MARSHAK, Grunfeld, Desiderio, Lebowitz, Sil- verman & Klestadt LLP, New York, NY, for plaintiffs- Case: 21-1489 Document: 75 Page: 2 Filed: 08/29/2022

2 YC RUBBER CO. (NORTH AMERICA) v. US

appellants YC Rubber Co. (North America) LLC, Sutong Tire Resources, Inc. Also represented by ALAN LEBOWITZ, MAX F. SCHUTZMAN; JORDAN CHARLES KAHN, Washington, DC.

JOHN MICHAEL PETERSON, Neville Peterson LLP, New York, NY, for plaintiff-appellant Mayrun Tyre (Hong Kong) Limited. Also represented by PATRICK KLEIN, RICHARD F. O'NEILL, Seattle, WA.

LIZBETH ROBIN LEVINSON, Fox Rothschild LLP, Wash- ington, DC, for plaintiff-appellant Kenda Rubber (China) Co., Ltd. Also represented by BRITTNEY RENEE POWELL, RONALD MARK WISLA.

ASHLEY AKERS, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washing- ton, DC, argued for defendant-appellee. Also represented by BRIAN M. BOYNTON, JEANNE DAVIDSON, PATRICIA M. MCCARTHY; AYAT MUJAIS, Office of the Chief Counsel for Trade Enforcement & Compliance, United States Depart- ment of Commerce, Washington, DC. ______________________

Before NEWMAN, SCHALL, and PROST, Circuit Judges. NEWMAN, Circuit Judge. This appeal is from the second administrative review of antidumping duties for certain passenger-vehicle and light-truck tires from the People’s Republic of China. Un- der review, there were forty-two exporters and producers of the subject products. The Department of Commerce ini- tially selected two respondents as representative; one of these two then withdrew from the review, and Commerce reviewed the remaining respondent and applied the result- ant antidumping duty rate to all exporters and producers subject to review. Commerce denied all requests to Case: 21-1489 Document: 75 Page: 3 Filed: 08/29/2022

YC RUBBER CO. (NORTH AMERICA) v. US 3

withdraw from the review after publishing its Preliminary Results. On appeal by several exporters and producers (collec- tively, “YC Rubber”), the Court of International Trade (“CIT”) affirmed. This appeal followed. BACKGROUND This second administrative review was initiated on Oc- tober 16, 2017. Initiation of Antidumping and Countervail- ing Duty Administrative Reviews, 82 Fed. Reg. 48,051, 48,055 (Oct. 16, 2017). Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1677(c)(1), Commerce is generally required to examine all known ex- porters/producers of the subject products and determine an individual weighted-average dumping margin for each ex- porter and producer. As is routine, Commerce allowed in- dividual exporters/producers to apply for separate rate status. Such respondents receive an individually calcu- lated dumping margin separate from the country-wide margin.