593 F.Supp.2d 1389, 31 ITRD 1073United States Court ofInternational Trade.GPX INTERNATIONAL TIRE CORPORATION and Hebei Starbright Tire Co., Ltd., Plaintiffs,v.UNITED STATES, Defendant,andBridgestone Americas Holding, Inc., Bridgestone Firestone North American Tire, LLC, Titan Tire Corporation, and United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO-CLC, Defendant-Intervenors.Slip Op. 08-146.Court Nos. 08-00285, 08-00286, 08-00287.Dec. 30, 2008.Background: Domestic importer and foreign producer/exporter of pneumatic off-the-road (OTR) tires from Peoples Republic of China challenged countervailing duty (CVD), antidumping (AD), and injury determinations by International Trade Commission (ITC). The Court of International Trade, 587 F.Supp.2d 1278, denied plaintiffs motion for temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to prevent imposition of 44% cash deposits for AD and CVD duties pending decision on merits. Plaintiffs moved for reconsideration or rehearing based on newly estimated cash deposit rate.Holdings: The Court of International Trade, Restani, Chief Judge, held that:(1) importer and producer/exporter lacked substantial likelihood of success on merits;(2) importer and producer/exporter were not likely to suffer irreparable harm absent preliminary injunction; and(3) balance of hardships did not favor preliminary injunction.Motion denied.West Headnotes1 KeyCite Citing References for this Headnote114 Customs Duties 114VII Protests and Review 114k84 Court of International Trade (Formerly Customs Court) and Proceedings Therein 114k84(8) Determination, Judgment, and Relief; Summary Judgment 114k84(8.1) k. In General. Most Cited CasesA rehearing will be granted only in limited circumstances, such as for (1) an error or irregularity, (2) a serious evidentiary flaw, (3) the discovery of new evidence which even a diligent party could not have discovered in time, or (4) an accident, unpredictable surprise, or unavoidable mistake which impaired a partys ability to adequately present its case. U.S.Ct.Int.Trade Rule 59(a)(2), 28 U.S.C.A.2 KeyCite Citing References for this Headnote114 Customs Duties 114VII Protests and Review 114k84 Court of International Trade (Formerly Customs Court) and Proceedings Therein 114k84(8) Determination, Judgment, and Relief; Summary Judgment 114k84(8.1) k. In General. Most Cited CasesThe grant or denial of a motion for reconsideration is within the discretion of the Court of International Trade and will not be granted merely to give a losing party another chance to re-litigate the case or present arguments it previously raised. U.S.Ct.Int.Trade Rule 59, 28 U.S.C.A.3 KeyCite Citing References for this Headnote114 Customs Duties 114VII Protests and Review 114k84 Court of International Trade (Formerly Customs Court) and Proceedings Therein 114k84(8) Determination, Judgment, and Relief; Summary Judgment 114k84(8.1) k. In General. Most Cited CasesDomestic importer and foreign producer/exporter seeking preliminary injunction, preventing imposition of newly estimated 29.8% cash deposit rate for antidumping duties (AD) and countervailing duties (CVD) on imported pneumatic off-the-road (OTR) tires, lacked substantial likelihood of success on merits of their challenge to AD, CVD, and injury determinations by International Trade Commission (ITC). Tariff Act of 1930, 701, 771(5), 19 U.S.C.A. 1671, 1677(5).4 KeyCite Citing References for this Headnote114 Customs Duties 114VII Protests and Review 114k84 Court of International Trade (Formerly Customs Court) and Proceedings Therein 114k84(8) Determination, Judgment, and Relief; Summary Judgment 114k84(8.1) k. In General. Most Cited CasesDomestic importer and foreign producer/exporter were not likely to suffer irreparable harm in absence of preliminary injunction, preventing imposition of newly estimated 29.8% cash deposit rate for antidumping duties (AD) and countervailing duties (CVD) on imported pneumatic off-the-road (OTR) tires. Tariff Act of 1930, 701, 771(5), 19 U.S.C.A. 1671, 1677(5).5 KeyCite Citing References for this Headnote114 Customs Duties 114VII Protests and Review 114k84 Court of International Trade (Formerly Customs Court) and Proceedings Therein 114k84(8) Determination, Judgment, and Relief; Summary Judgment 114k84(8.1) k. In General. Most Cited CasesBalance of hardships did not favor preliminary injunction, preventing imposition of newly estimated 29.8% cash deposit rate for antidumping duties (AD) and countervailing duties (CVD) on imported pneumatic off-the-road (OTR) tires. Tariff Act of 1930, 701, 771(5), 19 U.S.C.A. 1671, 1677(5).