Legal Opinion
Former Employees of Murray Engineering, Inc. v. Chao
United States Court of International Trade
Decided May 4, 2004No. Slip Op. 04-45, 03-00219PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
POGUE, Judge.
[Remanded to the Secretary of Labor for further investigation.]
In this action, Ken Walter (“Plaintiff’), as a former employee of Murray Engineering, Inc. (“Murray”), challenges the determination of the Department of Labor (“Labor” or “Defendant”) that he is not eligible for trade adjustment assistance (“TAA”) under the Trade Act of 1974 (“the Act”). Labor found that Plaintiff was not eligible for TAA based on its determinations that Murray neither produced an “article,” 1 nor a “component part” for a TAA-eertified business within the meaning of the Act. 2 Because Labor’s…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- United States v. Mead Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Nationsbank of North Carolina, N. A. v. Variable Annuity Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Carl Zeiss, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1999
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Former Employees of BMC Software, Inc. v. United States Secretary of LaborUnited States Court of International Trade · 2006
- Former Employees of Murray Engineering, Inc. v. ChaoUnited States Court of International Trade · 2005