Timken Company v. United States
United States Court of International Trade
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
TSOUCALAS, Senior Judge.
I. Standard of Review
The Court will uphold the United States International Trade Commission’s (“ITC” or “Commission”) redetermination pursuant to the Court’s remand unless it is “unsupported by substantial evidence on the record, or otherwise not in accordance with law.” 19 U.S.C. § 1516a(b)(l)(B)(i) (1994). Substantial evidence is “more than a mere scintilla. It means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, 340 U.S. 474, 477, 71 S.Ct. 456, 95 L.Ed. 456 (1951) (quoting…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Consolo v. Federal Maritime CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Allentown MacK Sales & Service, Inc. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Citrosuco Paulista, S.A. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1988
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Awp Industries, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2011
- Wabtec Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2026