Timken U.S. Corporation and Timken Nadellager, Gmbh 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 the court “however, has never discouraged the correction of errors at the preliminary result stage; we have only balanced the desire for accuracy in antidumping duty determinations with the need for finality at the final results stage.”
• explaining that “Commerce is free to correct any type of importer error” if the request is timely and justi- fied
• holding Commerce should have accepted new evidence because the respondent submitted it before Commerce “issued the final results”
• holding that Commerce impermissibly rejected respondent’s clerical error correction
• noting that it “appears that Commerce has not issued any regulation addressing whether an importer can correct errors in the information it has submitted, [nor] restricted the types of importer errors that are eligible for such correction.”
• commenting disapprovingly on the Department’s rejection of information as unverified when Commerce could have, but did not, subject that information to verification

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).