MILLER AND CO. v. United States
United States Court of International Trade
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
RESTANI, Judge:
This action challenges a determination upon the annual review of a countervailing duty order regarding Brazilian pig iron. The year under review was 1981. In this court’s previous opinion in this matter, Miller and Co. v. United States, 8 CIT 281, 598 F.Supp. 1126 (1984), this court determined that no jurisdiction existed for an action under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(c) (1982) inasmuch as plaintiff did not participate in the underlying administrative proceedings. See 19 U.S.C. § 1516a(a)(2)(A) (1982) (participation made a prerequisite to suit). The only possible jurisdictional…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Ambassador Division of Florsheim Shoe v. The United States, and Footwear Industries of America, Inc., IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Philipp Bros., Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1986
- American Permac, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1986
- UST, INC. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1986
- Miller and Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1984
3Cited by3 opinions
- Miller & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- Omni U.S.A., Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1987
- Miller & Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987