Geneva Steel 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.

• basing, in part, its conclusion that Commerce’s failure to aggregate the grants received was an error of addition and therefore Commerce’s characterization of the error as “inadvertent” was a ministerial error
• sustaining Commerce’s refusal to offset countervailable benefits by the taxes paid as a result of receiving subsidy benefits
• basing, in part, its conclusion that Commerce’s failure to aggregate the grants received was an error of addition and therefore a ministerial error on Commerce’s characterization of the error as “inadvertent”
• sustaining negative finding of de jure specificity based on similar evidence
• describing Commerce’s practice of measuring countervailable benefits from government equity infusions
• “[I]t is hereby * * * ORDERED that Commerce shall determine whether Sidmar’s redemption of preferred shares was on terms inconsistent with commercial considerations ***.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).