U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 1994

The Timken Company v. The United States, Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd., Koyo Corporation of U.S.A., Inc., Nsk, Ltd. And Nsk Corporation

The Timken Company v. The United States, Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd., Koyo Corporation of U.S.A., Inc., Nsk, Ltd. And Nsk Corporation
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · Decided September 27, 1994 · Archer, Friedman, Rader
37 F.3d 1470; 16 I.T.R.D. (BNA) 1801; 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 26912; 1994 WL 524629 (Federal Reporter, Third Series)

Counsel

Terence P. Stewart, Stewart & Stewart, Washington, DC, argued, for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief were Eugene L. Stewart, James R. Cannon, Jr., John M. Breen and Vincent J. Branson., Velta A. Melnbrencis, Asst. Director, Commercial Litigation Branch, Dept, of Justice, Washington, DC, argued, for defendant-ap-pellee. With her on the brief were Frank W. Hunger, Asst. Atty. Gen. and David M. Cohen, Director. Also on the brief were Stephen J. Powell, Chief Counsel, Bernieee A. Browne, Sr. Counsel, and Joan L. Mac-Kenzie, Attorney-Advisor, Office of the Chief Counsel for Import Admin., U.S. Dept, of Commerce, of counsel., James A. Geraghty, Donohue & Donohue, of New York City, argued, for defendants-appellees, NSK, Ltd. and NSK Corp., Joseph F. Donohue, Jr., and Kathleen C. Inguaggia-to, of Donohue & Donohue were on the brief for defendants-appellees., Peter 0. Suehman, Susan P. Strommer, Robert Torresen, Jr., and Robert A. Calaff, Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy, Washington, DC, were on the brief, for defendants-appellees, Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd. and KOYO Corp. of U.S.A., Inc.

The Timken Company v. The United States, Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd., Koyo Corporation of U.S.A., Inc., Nsk, Ltd. And Nsk Corporation

Cases that cite this one

10 later published cases cite this decision. The 9 that cite it most often are listed here.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Concurring Opinion

ARCHER, Chief Judge *,

concurring.

I concur in the judgment of the majority. To the extent this opinion holds, on both issues, that the International Trade Administration’s interpretation of the relevant statute is a reasonable one, I join the opinion.

Judge Archer assumed the position of Chief Judge on March 18, 1994.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.