Whirlpool Corp. 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.

• “Commerce presents no convincing reason why the plain language of this exclusion, which appears to describe the assembled handles, would not be dispositive were the general scope language presumed to describe these goods.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).