No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Remarks by Douglas E. Rosenthal
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 February 2017
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Extraterritoriality: Conflict and Overlap in National and International Regulation
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of International Law 1980
References
17 United States v. Aluminum Co. of America, 148 F.2d 416 (2d Cir. 1945).
18 In Re Uranium Antitrust Litigation, MDL 342 No 76C 3830 (N.D. I11.); See e.g. 1980-1 Trade Cas. § 63, 183 (7th Qir. 1980).
19 In Re Investigation of World Arrangements with Relation to the Prod., Transp., Ref. & Distrib. of Petroleum, 13 F.R.D. 280, (D.D.C. 1952). The grand jury was ultimately discharged without returning an indictment, and a civil case was thereupon filed. See United States v. Standard Oil Co (N.J.), 23 F.R.D. 1 (S.D.N.Y. 1958).
20 In Re Grand Jury Investigation of the Shipping Indus., 186 F. Supp. 298 (D.D.C. 1960). This grand jury did not return an indictment, nor was a civil suit filed.
21 United States v. Watchmakers of Switzerland Information Center, Inc. 1963 Trade Cas. § 70,600 (S.D.N.Y. 1962).
22 United States v. Watchmakers of Switzerland Information Center, Inc. 1965 Trade Cas. § 71,352 (S.D.N.Y. 1965).
23 American Law Institute (1965).
24 Canada, Australia, France, and Great Britain have filed amicus briefs expressing concern with the continuation of the Uranium Antitrust Litigation referred to in footnote 18, supra.
25 See Timberlane Lumber Co. v. Bank of America, N.T.&S.A., 549 F.2d 597 (9th Cir. 1976).