Dixon Ticonderoga Company v. United States, and Musgrave Pencil Company, Rosemoon Pencil Company and General Pencil Company
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
ARCHER, Senior Circuit Judge.
The government and Musgrave Pencil Company, Rosemoon Pencil Company, and General Pencil Company (“the pencil companies”) appeal the United States Court of International Trade’s judgment granting Dixon Ticonderoga Company’s (“Dixon”) motion for judgment on the administrative record. Dixon Ticonderoga Co. v. United States Customs & Border Prot., 366 F.Supp.2d 1352 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2005). Because the record contains no evidence that Dixon was substantially prejudiced by the United States Customs and Border Protection’s (“Customs”) failure to timely publish a notice…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- American Farm Lines v. Black Ball Freight ServiceSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Brock v. Pierce CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Consolidated Bearings Company, Plaintiff-Cross v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
- Intercargo Insurance Company F/k/a International Cargo & Surety Co., (Surety for M. Genauer) v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- Kemira Fibres Oy v. The United States, Ronald H. Brown, Secretary of Commerce, and Department of CommerceCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Canadian Lumber Trade Alliance v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
- Furniture Brands International, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2011
- Tianjin Magnesium Intern. Co., Ltd. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2008
- Suntec Industries Co., Ltd. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017
- United States v. Great American Ins. Co. of NyUnited States Court of International Trade · 2011
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.