19 C.F.R. § 210.36

General provisions for hearings

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Purpose of hearings. (1) An opportunity for a hearing shall be provided in each investigation under this part, in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act. At the hearing, the presiding administrative law judge will take evidence and hear argument for the purpose of determining whether there is a violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, and for the purpose of making findings and recommendations, as described in § 210.42(a)(1)(ii), concerning the appropriate remedy and the amount of the bond to be posted by respondents during Presidential review of the Commission's action, under section 337(j) of the Tariff Act.

(2) An opportunity for a hearing in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act shall also be provided in connection with every motion for temporary relief filed under this part.

(b) Public hearings. All hearings in investigations under this part shall be public unless otherwise ordered by the administrative law judge.

(c) Expedition. Hearings shall proceed with all reasonable expedition, and, insofar as practicable, shall be held at one place, continuing until completed unless otherwise ordered by the administrative law judge.

(d) Rights of the parties. Every hearing under this section shall be conducted in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act (i.e., 5 U.S.C. §§ 554 through 556). Hence, every party shall have the right of adequate notice, cross-examination, presentation of evidence, objection, motion, argument, and all other rights essential to a fair hearing.

(e) Presiding official. An administrative law judge shall preside over each hearing unless the Commission shall otherwise order.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1981–2017 · leading case: Suprema, Inc. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 796 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Suprema, Inc. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 796 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2015). · cites it 2× “The Commission’s investigations under Section 337 require “adequate notice, cross-examination, presentation of evidence, objection, motion, argument, and all other rights essential to a fair hearing,” 19 C.F.R. § 210.36 (d), thus satisfying Mead’s formality requirement.”

Sealed Air Corp. v. U.S. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 68 C.C.P.A. 93 (C.C.P.A. 1981). “19 CF R. 210.36. ITC has subsequently recognized this requirement in In re Certain Rotary Scraping Tools, 208 USPQ 356 (1980).”

Organik Kimya, San. Ve Tic. A.S. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 848 F.3d 994 (Fed. Cir. 2017). “Genentech refers to 19 C.F.R. § 210.36 (b) instead of § 210.33(b) because the interim rule was found at § 210.”

Genentech, Inc. v. United States Int'l Trade Comm'n, 122 F.3d 1409 (Fed. Cir. 1997). “19 C.F.R. § 210.36 (b) (1994). CIR 210.36(b) then specifies non-exclusive action that the ALJ may take as a sanction, such as construing the evidence adversely to the offending party, taking certain matters as established, limiting the evidence the offending party may present,…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.