Sandvik Steel Company v. United States, Fujitsu Ten Corporation of America 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.

• holding that “detailed . . . determination procedures that [agency] has provided constitute precisely the kind of administrative remedy that must be exhausted before a party may litigate the validity of the administrative action”
• stating that had the importers filed for scope determinations, Commerce may have decided the imports were not covered by the order, thus preventing litigation
• finding that the “detailed scope determination procedures that Commerce has provided constitute precisely the kind of administrative remedy that must be exhausted before a party may litigate the validity of the administrative action”
• noting that “the order’s meaning and scope are issues particularly within [Commerce’s] expertise”
• “no one is entitled to judicial relief for a supposed or threatened injury until the prescribed administrative remedy has been exhausted”
• The general rule is that “no one is entitled to judicial relief for a supposed or threatened injury until the prescribed administrative remedy has been exhausted.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).