Legal Opinion
Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd. And Koyo Corporation of U.S.A. v. United States, and the Timken Company
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided July 20, 2001No. 00-1500PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DYK, Circuit Judge.
This case presents the question whether the Department of Commerce’s (“Commerce”) regulation providing for the use of entered value of imported merchandise in the assessment rate formula (19 C.F.R. § 351.212(b)(1)) is consistent with the anti-dumping statute (codified in pertinent part at 19 U.S.C. § 1675) and, if so, whether it is reasonable. We conclude that Commerce’s interpretation is not foreclosed by the statute, nor have the appellants shown that the interpretation is unreasonable. We accordingly defer to that interpretation under Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural…
2Cases cited8 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
- F.lli De Cecco di Filippo Fara S. Martino S.p.A. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2000
- Torrington Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- United States v. Haggar Apparel Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1999
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Timken Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2004
- Corus Staal BV v. Department of CommerceCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- American Signature, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2010
- John Doe, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2004
- United States Steel Corp. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2010
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.