Legal Opinion
United States v. Eurodif S. A.
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided January 26, 2009No. 07-1059PublishedCited by 137 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Souter
Section 731 of the Tariff Act of 1930 calls for “antidumping” duties on “foreign merchandise” sold in the United States at “less than its fair value,” 19 U. S. C. § 1673, but does not touch international sales of services. These cases test the application of this antidumping provision to imports of low enriched uranium (LEU), a highly processed derivative of natural uranium used as nuclear fuel, when domestic utilities contract to obtain LEU for cash plus unenriched uranium delivered to a foreign enricher. Although the parties’ contracts call these transactions sales of uranium enrichment…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- United States v. Mead Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
- National Cable & Telecommunications Assn. v. Brand X Internet ServicesSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Tcherepnin v. KnightSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Frank Lyon Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by137 opinions
- City of Arlington v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'nSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- Yangzhou Bestpak Gifts & Crafts Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2013
- Nan Ya Plastics Corporation v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
- Xinjiamei Furniture (Zhangzhou) Co., Ltd. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2014
- Aqua Products, Inc. v. MatalCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017
132 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.