PT Pindo Deli Pulp and Paper Mills v. United States
This text of 2012 CIT 34 (PT Pindo Deli Pulp and Paper Mills v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of International Trade primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Slip Op. 12- 34
UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE
PT PINDO DELI PULP and PAPER MILLS,
Plaintiff,
v. Before: Jane A. Restani, Judge
UNITED STATES, Court No. 10-00370
Defendant, and
APPLETON COATED LLC, NEWPAGE CORPORATION, S.D. WARREN COMPANY d/b/a SAPPI FINE PAPER NORTH AMERICA, UNITED STEEL, PAPER AND FORESTRY, RUBBER, MANUFACTURING, ENERGY, ALLIED INDUSTRIAL AND SERVICE WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, AFL- CIO-CLC,
Intervenor Defendants.
[Plaintiff-Respondent PT Pindo Deli Pulp and Paper Mills’ motion for judgment on the agency record in countervailing duty order scope matter denied.]
Dated: March 16, 2012
Daniel L. Porter and James P. Durling, Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff. With them on the brief were Matthew P. McCullough and Ross E. Bidlingmaier.
Alexander V. Sverdlov, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for defendant. With him on the brief were Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Jeanne E. Davidson, Director, and Patricia M. McCarthy, Assistant Director. Of counsel on the brief was David Richardson, International Office of the Chief Counsel for Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, of Washington, DC. Court No. 10-00370 Page 2
William A. Fennell, Stewart and Stewart of Washington, DC, and Gilbert B. Kaplan, King & Spalding, LLP, of Washington DC, argued for intervenor defendants. With them on the brief were Elizabeth J. Drake and Terence P. Stewart, Stewart and Stewart, of Washington, DC, and Jeffrey M. Telep, Brian E. McGill, and Christopher T. Cloutier, King & Spalding, LLP, of Washington, DC.
ORDER
This case having been duly submitted for decision; and the court, after due
deliberation, having rendered a decision herein; Now therefore, in conformity with the decision
issued in Court No. 10-00369, Slip Op. 12-33, it is hereby
ORDERED that Plaintiff PT Pindo Deli and Paper Mills’ motion for judgment on
the agency record is denied and the challenged determination of Commerce is SUSTAINED.
/s/ Jane A. Restani Jane A. Restani Judge
Dated this 16th day of March, 2012. New York, New York.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2012 CIT 34, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pt-pindo-deli-pulp-and-paper-mills-v-united-states-cit-2012.