Hacker v. United States Secretary of Agriculture
United States Court of International Trade
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum
AQUILINO, Senior Judge:
Upon commencement of this action pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 2395 and 28 U.S.C. § 1581(d) to contest the denial of a cash benefit under the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Farmers program by the Foreign Agricultural Service (“FAS”), U.S. Department of Agriculture, the defendant interposed a motion to remand to FAS so that
it may issue a new and more detailed decision explaining the reasons for its denial of plaintiffs’ request for certification for trade adjustment assistance (“TAA”).
I
That motion was granted, and the order of remand has brought forth a reconsidered…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United States v. CattoSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Van Raden v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1979
- Louis Spitalny and Betty Spitalny, His Wife v. United States of America, William Erdwurm and Bart F. Erdwurm, His Wife v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970
- Anderson v. United States Sec'y of AgricultureUnited States Court of International Trade · 2006
- Robert J. And Mildred Frysinger v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.