Carrier Corporation v. Outokumpu Oyj

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the issue was “presented with sufficient clarity and completeness” where both parties “fully briefed” the issue on appeal
• holding that import exclusion applied because ʺthe result of that agreement [with foreign conspirators] was to raise prices artificially for ACR copper tubing for transactions between the co‐conspirators and buyers in the United Statesʺ
• concluding claim that a defendant offered “false and pretex-tual reasons”- for the pricing of copper tubing failed to satisfy Federal Civil Rule 9(b)
• explaining that the “rare exception created by Bell” is “quite narrow and ordinarily reserved for extremely weak claims”
• finding that jurisdiction under alter ego theory where plaintiff alleged that parent corporation had control over commercial and business policies of subsidiary
• finding that jurisdiction under alter ego theory where plaintiff alleged that parent corporation had control over commercial and business policies of subsidiary

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).