Legal Opinion

Mexichem Fluor Inc. v. United States

United States Court of International Trade

Decided June 6, 2016No. Slip Op. 16-54; Consol. Court No. 15-00004PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Gordon, Judge:

This consolidated action involves the final determination of the U.S. International Trade Commission (“Commission” or “ITC”) that an industry in the United States is not materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of imports of 1,1,1,2- Tetrafluoroethane (“R-134a”) from China. 1,1,1,2- Tetrafluoroe-thane from China, 79 Fed. Reg. 73,102 (Int’l Trade Comm’n Dec. 9, 2014) (final neg. determ.) (“Final Determination”); see also Views of the Commission, Inv. Nos. 701-TA-509 and 731-TA-1244 (Final), USITC Pub. 4503 (Dec. 2014) (“Views”).1 Before the court are…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. Consolo v. Federal Maritime CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  4. Nippon Steel Corporation, Nkk Corporation, Kawasaki Steel Corporation, and Toyo Kohan Co., Ltd. v. United States, and Mittal Steel USA Isg Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
  5. United States v. Eurodif S. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2009

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. DAK Americas LLC v. United StatesPublic version posted 06/04/2020.United States Court of International Trade · 2020
  2. Hyundai Steel Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2023

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API