Wooten v. United States, Secretary of Agriculture
United States Court of International Trade
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WALLACH, Judge.
I
Introduction
This matter comes before the court following Plaintiffs Motion to Supplement the Record (“Plaintiffs Motion”) filed on October 14, 2005. Defendant filed its Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion to Supplement the Record (“Defendant’s Opposition”) on November 4, 2005. For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs Motion is granted. This court has jurisdiction pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 2395 (2004).
II
Background
Plaintiff is challenging the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (“Defendant” or “Agriculture”) denial of TAA cash benefits regarding his catfish crop…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Former Employees of Linden Apparel Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1989
- Former Employees of Swiss Industrial Abrasives v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1993
- United Glass And Ceramic Workers Of North America, Afl-Cio v. F. Ray MarshallCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1978
- Hyundai Electronics Co., Ltd. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1999
- Van Trinh v. United States Secretary of AgricultureUnited States Court of International Trade · 2005
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- O'Toole v. U.S. Secretary of AgricultureUnited States Court of International Trade · 2007
- Wooten v. United States, Secretary of AgricultureUnited States Court of International Trade · 2006
- Den Hoed v. United States Secretary of AgricultureUnited States Court of International Trade · 2008
- Den Hoed v. United States Secretary of AgricultureUnited States Court of International Trade · 2008
- Hoed v. United States Secretary of AgricultureUnited States Court of International Trade · 2008