Yancheng Baolong Biochemical Prods. Co. v. United States, (2004)
United States Court of International Trade
Linked as:United States Court of International Trade
Linked as:Extract
Yancheng Baolong Biochemical Prods. Co. v. United States, (2004)
PAGE: 1
UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE BEFORE: GREGORY W. CARMANYANCHENG BAOLONG BIOCHEMICAL PRODUCTS COMPANY, LTD., Plaintiff, v.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant,andCRAWFISH PROCESSORS ALLIANCE, et al.,Defendant-Intervenors.[Defendant's Motion to Vacate the Court's Judgment Entered on July 16, 2003, is denied. This Court cannot award Plaintiff damages in the form of attorney fees associated with the contempt proceedings because the United States has not waived its sovereign immunity for such an award; Plaintiff's request for attorney fees is denied.]deKieffer & Horgan (J. Kevin Horgan), Washington, D.C., for Plaintiff.Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General; David M. Cohen, Director, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice; Jeanne E. Davidson, Deputy Director, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice; Paul D. Kovac, Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice; Stephen C. Tosini, Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice; Marisa Goldstein, Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel for Import Administration, United States Department of Commerce, of Counsel, for Defendant.Adduci, Mastriani & Schaumberg, L.L.P. (Will E. Leonard, Mark R. Leventhal, John C. Steinberger), Washington, D.C., for Defendant-Intervenors.Court No. 01-00338PAGE: 2Dated: April 28, 2004OPINIONCARMAN, Judge: There are two matters presently before this Court: 1) Defendant's Motion to Vacate the Court's Judgment Entered on July 16, 2003; and 2) Plaintiff's Memorandum on Damages to be Awarded Based on a Finding of Contempt for Violation of the Injunction Against Liquidation of Subject Entries. For the reasons set forth below, this Court denies Defendant's Motion to Vacate and does not award Plaintiff attorney fees as damages for Defendant's contempt.BACKGROUNDFamiliarity with this Court's opinion issued on July 16, 2003, is presumed. See Yancheng Baolong Biochemical Products Company, Ltd. v. United States, 277 F. Supp. 2d 1349 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2003) ("Yancheng Contempt Decision"). This Court incorporates the detailed recitation of the facts as agreed to by the parties at the show cause hearing on June 4, 2003, and as found by this Court in the Yancheng Contempt Decision. See id. at 1350-52. The facts leading up to the present matters are provided briefly below.In June 2001, Plaintiff sought judicial review of the United States Department of Commerce's ("Commerce") rescission of the administrative review of an antidumping duty order as to Plaintiff. See Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's Republic of China; Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrat...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
ver las páginas en versión mobile | web
ver las páginas en versión mobile | web
© Copyright 2012, vLex. All Rights Reserved.
Contents in vLex United States
Explore vLex
For Professionals
For Partners
Company
Other documents:
Prudential Financial Dispels Common Tax Misconceptions in Series Geared Toward Baby Boomers. | parents of abducted and sexually assaulted children join forces to form a survivi... | fremont produces $182m solutions for two construction projects. | Condo Flip Launches to Turn the Real Estate Bubble into a Real Estate Boom; Revolutionary Marketplace Allows Pre-Co... | Decisión nº 79-06 de Tribunal Séptimo de Primera Instancia en funciones de Control de Merida Exten... | Decisión de Tribunal Segundo de Primera Instancia en lo Civil, Mercantil, Transito y Agrario de Nueva Esp... | Decisión de Tribunal Segundo de Protección del Niño y Adolescente de Trujillo, de March 14,... | decisión nº 6c-2709-06 de tribunal sexto de control los teques de miranda, de february 02, 2007