giving preclusive effect to an earlier decision even when an appeal was still pending
How later courts described this case
- giving preclusive effect to an earlier decision even when an appeal was still pending
- “Congress invested the CIT with exclusive jurisdiction over a wide range of trade matters encompassing complex regulatory schemes in order to allocate power between the CIT and the district courts”
- “[I]t is well-established that a final trial court judgment operates as res judi-cata while an appeal is pending.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
DAVID A. NELSON, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I concur in the judgment and in most of Chief Judge Merritt’s scholarly opinion. Unlike my colleagues, however, I am not prepared to say that the district court failed to accord Commodities an adequate opportunity to present its due process arguments.
The reason the district court’s due process decision ought to be vacated, in my view, is that we erred in directing the district court to decide the due process issues in the first place. As indicated in the separate opinion I filed when this case was last before us, 888 F.2d at 439-40, I have thought from the beginning that the case belonged in the Court of International Trade and not in the district court.