NOTE: This order is nonprecedential United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit PAT HUVAL RESTAURANT & OYSTER BAR, INC., AQUA FARMS CRAWFISH, INC., CATFISH WHOLESALE, INC., CHARLES BERNARD (DOING BUSINESS AS CHARLES’ CRAWFISH PAD), ANDRE LEGER (DOING BUSINESS AS CHEZ FRANCOIS), JIM FRUGE (DOING BUSINESS AS FISHERMAN’S COVE), J. BERNARD SEAFOOD PROCESSING, INC., FRENCH’S ENTERPRISES SEAFOOD PEELING PLANT, AND KOYO CORPORATION OF U.S.A., ` Plaintiffs, AND SKF USA, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, V. UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, Defendant-Appellee, AND UNITED STATES CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION, Defendcznt-Appellee, AND THE TIMKEN COMPANY AND MPB CORPORATION, PAT HUVAL RESTAURANT V. ITC 2 Defendants-Appellees.

2012-1250 Appeal from the United States Court of International Trade in consolidated case no. O6-CV-0290, Judge Gregory W. Carman.

ON MOTION ORDER SKF USA, Inc. moves to stay the briefing schedule.

The United States Customs and Border Patro1 and the United States International Trade Commissi.on oppose.

Timken U.S. Corporation and MPB Corporation do not oppose.

On May 8, 2012, this court issued an order treating Ashley Furniture Industries, Inc. v. United States (2012- 1196) and Ethan Allen Global, Inc. v. United States (2012- 1200) as companion cases for purposes of oral argument before the same merits pane1.

SKF asserts this case and Ashley Fu.rniture and Ethan Allen involve related issues regarding the constitu- tionality of certain provisions of the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act (CDSOA) and this court’s decision in SKF USA, Inc. u. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 556 F.3d 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2009).

The court notes that oral argument in Ashley Furni- ture and Ethan Allen has not yet been scheduled.

Accordingly, IT ls ORDERED THAT: PAT HUVAL RESTAURANT V. ITC (1) The motion for a stay is granted. This appeal is stayed pending disposition of Ashley Furniture (2012- 1196), and Ethan Allen (2012-1200). Within 14 days thereof, SKF is directed to inform this court concerning how it believes this appeal should proceed. The other parties may also respond within that time. (2) A copy of this order will be forwarded to the mer- its panel in appeal nos. 2012-1196 and 2012-1200.

FOR THE COURT MA¥ 0 9 /sl Jan Horbaly Date J an Horbaly Clerk ccc Herbert C. Shelley, Esq.

Patrick V. Gallagher, Esq. F"£D §:;:‘;;:,?@S;::‘;:;;E::»E$q NAY 9 9 2{]12 JAN H{JRBAL¥ CLEHK