CANADIAN WHEAT BD. v. U.S.

No. 2010-1083.

641 F.3d 1344 (2011)

CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD, Plaintiff-Appellee, and Government of Canada, Plaintiff-Appellee, and Government of Alberta, Plaintiff-Appellee, and Government of Ontario, Plaintiff-Appellee, and Government of Saskatchewan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellant.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

April 19, 2011.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Danielle Spinelli , Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, of Washington DC, argued for all plaintiffs-appellees. With her on the brief for plaintiff-appellee Government of Canada were Randolph D. Moss , and Micah S. Myers . Of counsel on the brief were Mark C. Fleming , of Boston, MA. Also on the brief were M. Jean Anderson and John M. Ryan , Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, of Washington, DC.

Mark A. Moran , Steptoe & Johnson LLP, of Washington, DC, for plaintiff-appellee Canadian Wheat Board. Of counsel were Jamie B. Beaber and Matthew S. Yeo .

Lawrence A. Schneider , Arnold & Porter LLP, of Washington, DC, for plaintiff-appellee Government of Alberta. With him on the brief was Francis Franze-Nakamura .

Mark S. McConnell , Hogan Lovells US LLP, of Washington, DC, for plaintiff-appellee Government of Ontario. With him on the brief were H. Deen Kaplan and Jonathan T. Stoel .

Michele Sherman Davenport , Davenport & James PLLC, of Washington, DC, for plaintiff-appellee Government of Saskatchewan.

Jeanne E. Davidson , Director, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for the defendant-appellant. With her on the brief were Tony West , Assistant Attorney General, Patricia M. McCarthy , Assistant Director, and Stephen C. Tosini . Of counsel was Scott D. McBride , Senior Attorney, Office of the Chief Counsel for Import Administration, United States Department of Commerce, of Washington, DC.

Before NEWMAN, FRIEDMAN, and LOURIE, Circuit Judges.


FRIEDMAN, Circuit Judge.

The principal question is whether, after a North American Free Trade Agreement ("NAFTA") binational panel has invalidated a federal antidumping duty order and the Department of Commerce ("Commerce") has revoked the order, the invalidated duties that had been deposited prior to the date of that determination but that had not been liquidated, may be recovered from the United States by the depositors of those duties. The Court of International...

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