19 C.F.R. § 210.47

Petitions for reconsideration

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

Within 14 days after service of a Commission determination, any party may file with the Commission a petition for reconsideration of such determination or any action ordered to be taken thereunder, setting forth the relief desired and the grounds in support thereof. Any petition filed under this section must be confined to new questions raised by the determination or action ordered to be taken thereunder and upon which the petitioner had no opportunity to submit arguments. Any party desiring to oppose such a petition shall file an answer thereto within five days after service of the petition upon such party. Any party desiring to oppose such a petition shall file an answer thereto within five days after service of the petition upon such party. The Commission on its own initiative may order reconsideration of a Commission determination or any action ordered to be taken thereunder. The filing of a petition for reconsideration shall not stay the effective date of the determination or action ordered to be taken thereunder or toll the running of any statutory time period affecting such determination or action ordered to be taken thereunder unless specifically so ordered by the Commission.

[ 59 FR 39039, Aug. 1, 1994, as amended at 83 FR 21162, May 8, 2018]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1997–2011 · leading case: Mems Tech. Berhard v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 447 F. App'x 142 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Mems Tech. Berhard v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 447 F. App'x 142 (Fed. Cir. 2011). “Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 210.47 , Knowles requested reconsideration of the chamber-chip issue in the Commission’s order, and MemsTech opposed.”

Crucible Materials Corp. v. United States Int'l Trade Comm'n, 127 F.3d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1997). “Crucible filed a petition for reconsideration with the Commission pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 210.47 (1997); this petition is still pending.”

Gamut Trading Co. v. United States Int'l Trade Comm'n, 200 F.3d 775 (Fed. Cir. 1999). “Thus the Commission held that Gamut’s proposal did not raise any new factual or legal issues, see 19 C.F.R. § 210.47 (stating the criteria for reconsideration), and declined reconsideration.”

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.