C.F.R. » Title 19 » CHAPTER II—UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION › SUBCHAPTER C—INVESTIGATIONS OF UNFAIR PRACTICES IN IMPORT TRADE › PART 210—ADJUDICATION AND ENFORCEMENT › Subpart H—Temporary Relief

19 C.F.R. § 210.54

Service of motion by the complainant

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

Notwithstanding the provisions of § 210.11 regarding service of the complaint by the Commission upon institution of an investigation, on the day the complainant files a complaint and motion for temporary relief, if any, with the Commission (see § 210.8(a)(1) and (a)(2) of subpart B of this part), the complainant must serve non-confidential copies of both documents (as well as non-confidential copies of all materials or documents attached thereto) on all proposed respondents and on the embassy in Washington, DC of the country in which each proposed respondent is located as indicated in the Complaint. If a complainant files any supplemental information with the Commission prior to institution, nonconfidential copies of that supplemental information must be served on all proposed respondents and on the embassy in Washington, DC of the country in which each proposed respondent is located as indicated in the complaint. The complaint, motion, and supplemental information, if any, shall be served by messenger, overnight delivery, or equivalent means. A signed certificate of service must accompany the complaint and motion for temporary relief. If the certificate does not accompany the complaint and the motion, the Secretary shall not accept the complaint or the motion and shall promptly notify the submitter. Actual proof of service on each respondent and embassy (e.g., certified mail return receipts, messenger, or overnight delivery receipts, or other proof of delivery)—or proof of a serious but unsuccessful effort to make such service—must be filed within 10 days after the filing of the complaint and motion. If the requirements of this section are not satisfied, the Commission may extend its 35-day deadline under § 210.58 for determining whether to provisionally accept the motion for temporary relief and institute an investigation on the basis of the complaint.

[73 FR 38326, July 7, 2008, as amended at 78 FR 23485, Apr. 19, 2013]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1980–1999 · leading case: Tong Seae Indus. Co. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 67 C.C.P.A. 160 (C.C.P.A. 1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Tong Seae Indus. Co. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 67 C.C.P.A. 160 (C.C.P.A. 1980). · cites it 3× “102 and Polybubble did not file any exceptions under 19 CFR 210.54 4 to the ALJ’s failure to address the issues of invalidity under 35 U.”
Finnigan Corp. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 180 F.3d 1354 (Fed. Cir. 1999). “43 (b) (1998), requires that a petition for review ’contain a “concise argument providing the reasons why review by the Commission is necessary,” and specifying that “[a]ny issue not raised in the petition for review-will be deemed to have been abandoned.”
Intel Corp. v. U.S. Int'l Trade Comm'n, & Atmel Corp., Gen. Instrument Corp. & Microchip Tech. Inc., Hyundai Elec. Indus. Co., Ltd., & Hyundai Elec. Am., Inc. & Seeq Tech., Inc., Intervenors-Appellees. Atmel Corp. v. U.S. Int'l Trade Comm'n, & Intel Corp. & Seeq Tech., Inc., Intervenors-Appellees. Gen. Instrument Corp. & Microchip Tech. Inc. v. U.S. Int'l Trade Comm'n, & Intel Corp. & Seeq Tech., Inc., Intervenors-Appellees, 946 F.2d 821 (Fed. Cir. 1991). “See 19 C.F.R. 210.54(a)(ii). As a result, the Commission contends that GI/M abandoned these issues below and is not entitled to have this court review them We disagree.”
Texas Instruments Inc. v. United States Int'l Trade Comm'n, 988 F.2d 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1993). “19 C.F.R. § 210.54 (a)(2) (1992). Respondents having failed to alert the Commission to a possible error in the AU’s initial decision, this court will not now examine the issue.”
Checkpoint Sys., Inc. v. United States Int'l Trade Comm'n, 54 F.3d 756 (Fed. Cir. 1995). “” See 19 C.F.R. § 210.54 (a) (1994). The rules further provide that “[a]ny issue not raised in the petition for review .”
Allied Corp. v. United States Int'l Trade Comm'n, 850 F.2d 1573 (Fed. Cir. 1988). · cites it 2× “ITC’s rules require a concise statement of the reasons why review of the ID is necessary, 19 C.F.R. § 210.54 (a)(ii), (iii), (iv) (1988), and provide that any issue not raised in the petition will be deemed abandoned, 19 C.”
Intel Corp. v. U.S. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 946 F.2d 821 (Fed. Cir. 1991). “See 19 C.F.R. 210.54(a)(ii). As a result, the Commission contends that GI/M abandoned these issues below and is not entitled to have this court review them.”
— 19 C.F.R. § 210.54(a)(ii) — 2 cases
Intel Corp. v. U.S. Int'l Trade Comm'n, & Atmel Corp., Gen. Instrument Corp. & Microchip Tech. Inc., Hyundai Elec. Indus. Co., Ltd., & Hyundai Elec. Am., Inc. & Seeq Tech., Inc., Intervenors-Appellees. Atmel Corp. v. U.S. Int'l Trade Comm'n, & Intel Corp. & Seeq Tech., Inc., Intervenors-Appellees. Gen. Instrument Corp. & Microchip Tech. Inc. v. U.S. Int'l Trade Comm'n, & Intel Corp. & Seeq Tech., Inc., Intervenors-Appellees, 946 F.2d 821 (Fed. Cir. 1991). “See 19 C.F.R. 210.54(a)(ii). As a result, the Commission contends that GI/M abandoned these issues below and is not entitled to have this court review them We disagree.”
Intel Corp. v. U.S. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 946 F.2d 821 (Fed. Cir. 1991). “See 19 C.F.R. 210.54(a)(ii). As a result, the Commission contends that GI/M abandoned these issues below and is not entitled to have this court review them.”
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.