Wieland Werke, AG 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.

• stating that the ITC’s inquiry is “whether ‘reasonable overlap’ of competition exists”
• rejecting plaintiffs’ argument that the Commission ignored the industry cycle in finding that imports were a cause of material injury
• stating the factors considered by the ITC in a prior final determination
• stating the factors considered by the ITC in a prior final determination
• “To invoke the cumulation statute, the imports to be cumulated must compete with one another and with the domestic like products they allegedly injure.”
• “the Commission acted reasonably in gathering the data, identifying its inherent weaknesses, and tempering its reliance on the data”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).