Minn-Chem, Incorpora v. Agrium Inco

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that import exclusion applied because transactions in which plaintiffs purchased potash directly from foreign cartel members constitute import commerce
• applying Morrison and overturning previous decision the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act’s territoriality was jurisdictional—holding it instead goes to the merits of the claim
• “Superimposing the idea of ‘immediate consequence’ on top of the full phrase results in a stricter test than the complete statute can bear.”
• interpreting a different statute and concluding that “foreign supply restrictions, and the concomitant price increases forced upon . . . purchasers, were a direct—that is, proximate—cause of . . . subsequent price increases in the United States”
• “the FTAIA’s criteria relate to the merits of a claim, and not to the subject- matter jurisdiction of the court”
• “The applicability of U.S. law to transactions in which a good or service is being sent directly into the United States, with no intermediate stops, is both fully predictable to foreign entities and necessary for the protection of U.S. consumers.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).