SANDVIK STEEL COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.
Fujitsu Ten Corporation of America, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
United States, Defendant-Appellee.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
November 13, 1998.
November 13, 1998.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Warren E. Connelly, Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, L.L.P., for plaintiff-appellant Sandvik Steel Company.
James A. Curley, Attorney, Civil Division, Commercial Litigation Branch, International Trade Field Office, U.S. Department of Justice, New York City, argued, for defendant-appellee United States, in 97-1261. With him on the brief were Frank W. Hunger, Assistant Attorney General, and David M. Cohen, Director, Civil Division, Commercial Litigation Branch, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, and Joseph I. Liebman, Attorney-in Charge, International Trade Field Office. Of counsel on the brief were Beth C. Brotman, Attorney, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, International Trade Litigation, United States Customs Service, New York City; and Dean A. Pinkert, Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel for Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC. Of counsel was Joan L. MacKenzie, Attorney.
Mark S. Zolno, Katten Muchin & Zavis, Chicago, IL, argued, for plaintiff-appellant Fujitsu Ten Corporation of America. With him on the brief was Michael E. Roll.
Rhonda K. Schnare, Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued, for defendant-appellee United States in 97-1338. With her on the brief were Frank W. Hunger, Assistant Attorney General, and David M. Cohen, Director.
Before SCHALL, Circuit Judge, FRIEDMAN, Senior Circuit Judge, and GAJARSA, Circuit Judge.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
FRIEDMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
The issue in these two cases, which we decide in a single opinion, is whether the failure of an importer to exhaust its administrative remedy by seeking a ruling by the Department of Commerce ("Commerce") that an antidumping order does not cover certain products it imported, precludes it from obtaining review of that issue in the Court of International Trade by there challenging the United States Customs Service's ("Customs") denial...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
