Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether, despite this Court's "well established" interpretation of the Sherman Act, U.S. courts may reinterpret the same text of that Act case by case using a discretionary ten-factor balancing test under the doctrine of prescriptive comity.
Whether a court interpreting the meaning of foreign law under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 44.1 is limited to the "face" of written legal materials, as the decision below held, or may also consider evidence as to how foreign law is implemented and enforced that would be relevant to the interpretive inquiry in the foreign legal system.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether U.S. courts may reinterpret the Sherman Act using a discretionary ten-factor balancing test under the doctrine of prescriptive comity
2022-07-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-07-06
Reply of petitioners Animal Science Products Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)
2022-06-21
Brief of respondents Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., et al. in opposition filed.
2022-04-22
Brief amicus curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States filed.
2022-04-13
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including June 21, 2022.
2022-04-12
Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 22, 2022 to June 21, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
2022-04-11
Brief amici curiae of Professors William S. Dodge and Paul B. Stephan filed.
2022-03-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 22, 2022)
2021-12-16
Application (21A227) granted by Justice Sotomayor extending the time to file until March 21, 2022.
2021-12-13
Application (21A227) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from January 19, 2022 to March 20, 2022, submitted to Justice Sotomayor.