Slip Op. 09-57
UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE
AD HOC UTILITIES GROUP,
Plaintiff,
v. Before: Pogue, Judge
Court No. 06-00300
UNITED STATES,
Defendant,
- and -
USEC INCORPORATED, and UNITED STATES
ENRICHMENT CORPORATION,
Defendant-Intervenors.
ORDER
[Defendant’s and Defendant-Intervenors’ motions to dismiss
granted.]
June 16, 2009
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP (Nancy A. Fischer, Joshua
D. Fitzhugh, Christine J. Sohar, Kemba T. Eneas and Stephan E.
Becker) for Plaintiff Ad Hoc Utilities Group.
James M. Lyons, General Counsel, Neal J. Reynolds, Assistant
General Counsel, Office of the General Council, U.S. International
Trade Commission (Peter L. Sultan) for Defendant United States.
Steptoe & Johnson LLP (Eric C. Emerson, Sheldon E. Hochberg,
Richard O. Cunningham, Thomas J. Trendl and Alexandra E.P. Baj)
for Defendant-Intervenors USEC Inc. and United States Enrichment
Corp.
Pogue, Judge: Plaintiff Ad Hoc Utilites Group (“AHUG”), a
group of American utility companies that purchases and uses
uranium, seeks review of the International Trade Commission’s
(“ITC”) decision in Uranium From Russia, 71 Fed. Reg. 44,707 (ITC
Aug. 6, 2006) (concluding that termination of the suspended
investigation on uranium from Russia would be likely to lead to
continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the
United States) and accompanying Uranium from Russia, USITC Pub.
3872, Inv. No. 731–TA–539–C (Aug. 2006). Defendant United States
and Defendant-Intervenors move to dismiss, pursuant to USCIT Rule
12(b)(1), for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, more
specifically lack of statutory standing under 28 U.S.C. § 2631(c).
The issues of law and fact before the court are no different
than those presented in Ad Hoc Utilities Group v. United States,
Cause No. 06-229 (“AHUG”) (AHUG’s challenge to Commerce’s final
determination that termination of the suspended investigation on
uranium from Russia would likely result in continued dumping of
enriched uranium). Parties in AHUG and the case at bar are
identical, and there is no significant argument raised by Plaintiff
here that was not considered by the court in AHUG. Accordingly,
for the reasons stated in AHUG, the court grants Defendant’s and
Defendant-Intervenors’ motions to dismiss for lack of standing.
Judgment will issue accordingly.
It is SO ORDERED.
/s/ Donald C. Pogue
Donald C. Pogue, Judge
Dated: June 16, 2009
New York, New York