Legal Opinion
Florida Tomato Exchange v. United States
United States Court of International Trade
Decided April 11, 2014No. Slip Op. 14-40; Court 13-00148PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EATON, Judge:
This matter is before the court on plaintiff The Florida Tomato Exchange’s (“plaintiff’ or the “FTE”) motion to strike certain exhibits and arguments from Defendant-intervenors’ Response to Plaintiffs Rule 56.2 Motion for Judgment on the Agency Record (ECF Dkt. No. 40). Pl.’s Mot. to Strike Portions of the Def.-Ints.’ Br. 1 (ECF Dkt. No. 47) (“Pl.’s Mot. to Strike”); see Pl.’s Rule 56.2 Mot. for J. on the Agency R. (ECF Dkt. No. 30) (“Rule 56.2 Mot.”). Plaintiff claims that, because the exhibits were not presented to the Department of Commerce (“Commerce” or the “Department”) in…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- New Hampshire v. MaineSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Pegram v. HerdrichSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Davis v. WakeleeSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Louis Eugene Russell v. Tom Rolfs, SuperintendentCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Harriet Rissetto v. Plumbers and Steamfitters Local 343, a Business Entity, Form Unknown, Michael Beavers and Does 1-25, InclusiveCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- JMC Steel Group v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2014
- Sumecht NA, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2018
- Arcelormittal U.S. LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2018
- Papierfabrik August Koehler SE v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2014
- Florida Tomato Exchange v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2015
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.