Fagersta Stainless AB v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the “only question before [the] court is whether the [agency’s] chosen methodology is reasonable, supported by substantial evidence on the record, and otherwise in accordance with the law”
• “compelling reasons” for altering model match criteria must be proven by “compelling and convincing evidence”
• “[o]nce Commerce has established a model-match methodology in an antidumping [proceeding], it will not modify that methodology in subsequent [segments] unless there are ‘compelling reasons’ to do so”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).