Kemira Fibres Oy v. The United States, Ronald H. Brown, Secretary of Commerce, and Department of Commerce

How courts have described this case

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

• ruling that the agency's failure to comply with mandatory time limit in regulation does not bar subsequent agency action
• “Since the requirement at issue is merely procedural, Kemira must establish that it was prejudiced by Commerce’s non-compliance with this requirement.”
• “Since the requirement at issue is merely procedural, Kemira must establish that it was prejudiced by Commerce’s noncompliance * * * ”
• as Dixon, 468 F.3d at 1355, summarized, “holding that failure to timely comply with the notice requirement of 19 C.F.R. § 353.25(d
• Commerce’s failure to abide by its own regulatory deadline does not void subsequent agency action
• as Dixon, 468 F.3d at 1355, summarized, “holding that failure to timely comply with the notice requirement of 19 C.F.R. § 353.25(d

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).