Slip Op. 06-91
UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE
BEFORE: SENIOR JUDGE NICHOLAS TSOUCALAS
________________________________________
:
FORMER EMPLOYEES OF GALE GROUP, INC. :
:
Plaintiffs, :
: Court No. 04-00374
v. :
:
UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF LABOR, :
:
Defendant. :
________________________________________:
ORDER
On June 2, 2006, the United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) remanded the case at bar to this Court for
the limited purpose of remanding this matter back to the United
States Department of Labor (“Labor”) to re-examine certification
for trade adjustment assistance (“TAA”) benefits.
On February 23, 2004, a petition for TAA benefits was filed on
behalf of the Former Employees of Gale Group, a subsidiary of
Thompson Corporation (“Plaintiffs”). On May 20, 2004, the United
States Department of Labor (“Labor”) issued a negative
determination regarding Plaintiffs’ eligibility for TAA benefits.
See Notice of Determination Regarding Eligibility to Apply for
Worker Adjustment Assistance, (“Negative Determination”) (June 9,
2004) published at 69 Fed. Reg. 33,940, 33,941 (June 17, 2004).
The Negative Determination was issued because Labor found that the
Plaintiffs did not produce an article within the meaning of Section
222 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended 19 U.S.C. § 2272 (“The
Trade Act”)(Supp. III 2003). See Notice of Negative Determination
on Remand, (“Remand Determination”) TA-W-54,434 (Jan. 27, 2005)
published at 70 Fed. Reg. 6,732 (Feb. 8, 2005). “The determination
was based on the investigation’s finding that the workers at the
subject facility performed electronic indexing services, including
converting paper periodicals into an electronic format, assigning
relevant index terms and occasionally writing abstracts of
articles. . ..” Id. On June 16, 2004, Plaintiffs filed a request
for administrative reconsideration with Labor. A negative
determination on reconsideration was then issued by Labor on July
13, 2004. See Dismissal of Application for Reconsideration, TA-W-
54,434 (July 16, 2004) published at 69 Fed. Reg. 44,064 (July 23,
2004). On July 23, 2004, the Plaintiffs requested judicial review
Court No. 04-00374 Page 2
by this Court. On October 19, 2004, Labor filed a motion for
voluntary remand. The Court granted Labor’s consent motion for
voluntary remand on October 25, 2004. Labor reaffirmed its
negative determination when it published its Remand Determination
on February 8, 2005. Remand Determination TA-W-54,434 (Jan. 27,
2005) published at 70 Fed. Reg. 6,732 (Feb. 8, 2005).
In its Remand Determination, Labor stated that “it is clearly
established that the workers of the subject [Gale Group] facility
did not produce an article, nor did they support, either directly
or through an appropriate subdivision, the production of an article
within the meaning of the Trade Act.” Remand Determination, 70
Fed. Reg. at 6,733. Labor, therefore, affirmed its original denial
of certification for TAA benefits. This Court affirmed Labor’s
determination on November 18, 2005. See Former Employees of Gale
Group, Inc. v. United States Sec’y of Labor, 29 CIT ___, 403 F.
Supp. 2d 1299 (2005). On January 12, 2006, Plaintiffs appealed
this Court’s judgment to the CAFC. Labor later published a
revision of its policy in its Notice of Revised Determination on
Remand for Computer Sciences Corporation, Financial Services Group,
East Hartford, Connecticut, TA-W-53,209, (March 24, 2006) published
at 71 Fed. Reg. 18,355 (April 11, 2006).1
Upon consideration of Labor’s consent motion for a voluntary
remand, and other papers and proceedings filed herein; it is hereby
ORDERED that this case shall be remanded to Labor to re-
examine its determination in light of its recent policy change.
/s/ Nicholas Tsoucalas
NICHOLAS TSOUCALAS
SENIOR JUDGE
Dated: June 19, 2006
New York, New York
1
Labor’s policy revision followed the issuance of this
Court’s decision in Former Employees of Computer Sciences Corp. v.
United States Sec’y of Labor, 29 CIT ___, 366 F. Supp. 2d 1365
(2005), a case which this Court finds to be easily distinguishable
from Former Employees of Gale Group, Inc., 29 CIT ___, 403 F. Supp.
2d 1299.