Legal Opinion

Crawfish Processors Alliance v. United States

United States Court of International Trade

Decided September 13, 2005No. Consol. 02-00376PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

TSOUCALAS, Senior Judge.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

The Court will uphold the United States Department of Commerce’s (“Commerce”) 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) (2000). 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 Consol. Edison Co. v. NLRB,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  3. Consolo v. Federal Maritime CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  4. Hontex Enterprises, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2003
  5. Crawfish Processors Alliance v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2004

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Crawfish Processors Alliance v. United States v. Hontex Enterprises [Reposted With Cover Sheet]Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2007
  2. Crawfish Processors Alliance v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2005
  3. Crawfish Processors Alliance v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API