1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 374 F.3d
  5. 374 F.3d 1087 (2004)
 

CANDLE CORP. OF AMER. v. U.S. INTERN. TRADE COM'N

No. 03-1348.

374 F.3d 1087 (2004)

CANDLE CORPORATION OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Blyth, Inc., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION and Deanna Tanner Okun, Chairman, United States International Trade Commission, Defendants, and United States Bureau of Customs and Border Protection and Robert C. Bonner, Commissioner, United States Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, Defendants-Appellees, and Candle-Lite Division of Lancaster Colony Corporation, Lumi-Lite Candle Co., and General Wax & Candle Co., Defendants-Appellees, and Muench-Kreuzer Candle Company, Defendant-Appellee.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

DECIDED: July 2, 2004.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

David A. Wilson, Hale and Dorr LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief was Joshua A. Davenport.

Paul D. Kovac, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for defendants-appellees, United States Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, et al. With him on the brief were Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, David M. Cohen, Director and Jeanne E. Davidson, Deputy Director. Of counsel on the brief was Ellen C. Daly, Senior Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, United States Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, of Washington, DC. Of counsel was Lucius B. Lau.

Eric P. Salonen, Stewart and Stewart, of Washington, DC, argued of defendants-appellees, Candle-lite Division of Lancaster Colony Corporation, et al. With him on the brief were Terence P. Stewart and Patrick J. McDonough.

Gregory C. Dorris, Pepper Hamilton LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for defendant-appellee, Muench-Kreuzer Candle Company. With him on the brief was Edward M. Andries.

Before MICHEL, GAJARSA, and DYK, Circuit Judges.

Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge DYK. Dissenting opinion filed by Circuit Judge GAJARSA.

DYK, Circuit Judge.

This case involves a proceeding pursuant to the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-387, § 1(a), 114 Stat. 1549, 1549A-73 (codified at 19 U.S.C. § 1675c (2000)) ("CDSOA" or "Byrd Amendment"), which entitled "affected domestic producers" to recover antidumping duties imposed on foreign producers. 19...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

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.

Citing Cases