Brother Industries (usa), Inc., Plaintiff-appellee, v. the United States, Defendant,andsmith Corona Corporation, Defendant-appellant.brother Industries (usa), Inc., Plaintiff-appellee, v. the United States, Defendant,andsmith Corona Corporation, Defendant-appellant, 1 F.3d 1253 (Fed. Cir. 1993)
Annotate this CaseBefore LOURIE, Circuit Judge, FRIEDMAN, Senior Circuit Judge, and CLEVENGER, Circuit Judge.
ON MOTION
ORDER
CLEVENGER, Circuit Judge.
Upon consideration of this court's dismissal of the related appeals in Brother Industries (USA), Inc. v. United States, 93-1010, -1085, we sua sponte consider whether we have jurisdiction over these appeals.
On this same date, we are dismissing the United States' appeal (93-1010) and Smith Corona Corporation's appeal (93-1085) because they are not appeals from an appealable order.
On December 8, 1992, Smith Corona filed a notice of appeal (93-1143) from the Court of International Trade's November 30, 1992 order concerning enforcement of the September 3, 1992 remand order. We conclude that, for the same reasons as stated in 93-1010, -1085, the appeal in 93-1143 should be dismissed as there is no final or appealable order.
On April 9, 1993, Smith Corona filed another notice of appeal challenging the September 3, 1992 remand order (93-1349). Smith Corona states that it filed this appeal because it believes that the remand proceedings required by the September 3, 1992 order are now "final" and that the September 3, 1992 order is now appealable. Smith Corona states that, on February 8, 1993, the International Trade Administration (ITA) determined on remand that Brother filed the petition "on behalf of" the domestic industry.
We note, however, that the Court of International Trade directed that, if Brother's petition was found to be filed "on behalf of" the domestic industry, an antidumping investigation should proceed. In any event, the ITA's actions do not make the Court of International Trade's remand order "final" for purposes of appealability. After the ITA has finished its investigation, any adversely affected party may seek recourse in the Court of International Trade and, thereafter, in this court.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) Appeal nos. 93-1143 and 93-1349 are dismissed.
(2) All other motions are moot.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
