Legal Opinion
Cathedral Candle Co. v. United States International Trade Commission
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided March 9, 2005No. 2004-1083PublishedCited by 147 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge BRYSON. Dissenting opinion filed by Circuit Judge DYK.
BRYSON, Circuit Judge.
Appellants Cathedral Candle Company (“Cathedral”) and The A.I. Root Company (“Root”) filed this action in the Court of International Trade seeking to compel the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (“Customs”) to distribute payments to them pursuant to the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000, Pub.L. No. 106-387, § 1(a) [tit. X, § 1003(a)], 114 Stat. 1549, 1549A-72 (2000), which is known as the Byrd Amendment. Cathedral and Root applied for Byrd Amendment…
2Cases cited46 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
- Udall v. TallmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- United States v. Mead Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Auer v. RobbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by147 opinions
- Ellis C. Smith, Claimant-Appellee v. R. James Nicholson, Secretary of Veterans AffairsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- SKF USA, Inc. v. United States Customs & Border ProtectionCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2009
- Kyocera Wireless Corp. v. International Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
- American Signature, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2010
- United States Steel Corp. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2010
142 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.