Max Fortune Industrial Ltd. 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.

• upholding Commerce’s decision to double bracket identifying information of a researcher Court No. 15-00182 Page 14 because disclosing its identity “could prove a danger to the researcher and the researcher’s methods of obtaining information in the future.”
• “[Plaintiff] cites to no statutory or regulatory authority to support its proposition that it has a ‘right to confront its accuser,’ and this Court declines [plaintiff’s] plea to read such a right into an administrative proceeding.” (internal citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).