^* The Honorable Robert L. Taylor, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Tennessee, sitting by designation.

¹ Letters rogatory are defined in The Signe, 37 F. Supp. 819, 820 (E.D. La. 1941):Letters rogatory are the medium, in effect, whereby onecountry, speaking through one of its courts, requests another country, acting through its own courts and by metheds of courtprocedure peculiar thereto and entirely within the latter's control, to assist the administration of justice in the formercountry; such request being inade, and being usually granted, by reason of the comity existing between nations in ordinarypeaceful times.

² § 1782. Assistance to foreign and international tribunals and to litigants before such tribunals.

(a) The district court of the district in which a person resides oris found may order him to give his testimony or statement or to produce a document or other thing for use in a proceeding in aforeign or international tribunal. The order may be made pursuant to a letter rogatoz-y issued, or request made, by a foreign or internationaltribunal or upon the application of any interested person and may direct that the testimony or statement be given, or thedocument or other thing be produced, before a person appointed by the court. By virtue of his appointment, the person appointed haspower to administer any necesary oath and take the testimony or statement. The order may prescribe the practice and procedure,which may be in whole or part the practice and procedure of the foreign country or the international tribunal, for taking the testimonyor statement or producing the document or other thing. To the extent that the order does not prescribe otherwise, the testimonyor statement shall be taken, and the document or other thing produced, in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.A person may not be compelled to give his testimony or statement or to produce a document or other thing in violation of anylegally applicable privilege. (b) This chapter does not preclude a person within the UnitedStates from voluntarily giving his testimony or statement, or producing a document or other thing, for use in a proceeding in a foreignor international tribunal before any person and in any manner acceptable to him. As amended Oct. 3, 1964, Pub.L. 88-619, §9(a), 78Stat. 997.

³ Act of March 2, 1855, ch. 140, §2, 10 Stat. 630. See attached Appendix.

⁴ Act of March 3, 1863, ch. 95, 12 Stat. 769-70. See Appendix.

⁵ Altheugh in force at the time, the 1855 Act (10 Stat. 630) was ignored by the subsequent legislation of 1863 (12 Stat. 769). Unlikethe 1855 law which applied only to foreign requests made to this country for the taking of evidence, the 1863 legislation extended torequests made by foreign governments and these made by the United States to courts abroad. In 1877 (19 Stat. 241) Congressenacted language virtually identical to that used in 1855 and appended it to Revised Statutes § 875. It apparently was intended to bea reciprocal provision providing assistance to foreign governments in cases in which they were parties or had an interest. However, atthe same time Revised Statutes §§ 4071-73, drawn from a portionof the 1863 enactment, set forth apparently more limited circumstances in which a foreign government could seek the aid of theUnited States courts; i.e. suits involving money or property in which the foreign nation was a party or had an interest. These two sets ofstatutes remained separate until 1948 when they were revised and consolidated at 28 U.S.C. §1781 et seq. (62 Stat. 949).

⁶ Act of June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 949. See Appendix.

⁷ Act of May 24, 1949, ch. 139, § 93, 63 Stat. 103. See Appendix.

⁸ In determining the scope of its statutory autherity, the court in Janssen v. B elding-Corticelli, Ltd., 84 F.2d 577 (3d Cir. 1936),examined the laws pertaining to requests made both to and from the United States. Revised Statutes §§ 875, 4071.9S. Rep. No. 1580, 1964 U.S. Code Cong. & Admin. News, p. 3789: Subsection (a) of proposed revised section 1782 gives thecourt complete discretion in prescribing the procedure to be followed. It permits, but does not command, follow:ng theforeign or international practice. If the court fails to prescribe the procedure, the appropriate provisions of the Federal Rulesof Civil Procedure are to be followed, irrespective of whether the foreign or international proceeding or investigation is of acriminal, civil, administrative, or other nature.

^* [Reproduced from U.S. International Trade Commission Report to the President on Investigation No. TA-201-5 under Section 201 of theTrade Act of 1974, pp. 1-54. The 94 pages of i n formation obtained inthe investigation and the statistical tables and figures have notbeen reproduced. [The President ' s Memorandum on import relief , dated March 16,1976, appears at I.L.M. page 379 . The Trade Act of 1974 appears at 14 I.L.M. 181 (1975). The President ' s decision was the first majorone under the provisions of the 1974 Trade Act which p rovideimport relief. From March 16, 1976, the United States Congress has 90working days, excluding days thatfall during recesses, to override a decision of the President that does not fully accept the recommendations of the International Trade Commission. [Inanaidememoire of March 22, 1976, delivered to the Departmentof State , the European Community expressedregretoverthed e c ision. TheCommunity noted that if the U.S. Government fails to concludem arketing agreements with key suppliers , import quotas could be opened at overall levels comparable to these recommended by the InternationalTrade Commission. In that event , the Community i nd i c ated,itwould exerciseit s rights under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.]

¹ / Chairman Leonard and Commissioners Moore and Bedell determine in the affirmative. Vice Chairman Minchew determines in the affirmativewith respect to stainless-steel bars and wire rods, and alloy tool steel in all forms and in the negative with respect to stainless-steel platesand sheets and strip. Commissioner Ablondi determines in the negative. Commissioner Parker abstained.

² / Chairman Leonard determines serious injury with respect to the listed articles other than stainless-steel plate, for which he determinesthreat of serious injury; he does not make a determination with respect to the threat of serious injury on articles other thanstainless-steel plate, as he considers that a determination of threat of serious injury is unnecessary in view of his determination ofserious injury.

³ / Vice Chairman Minchew determines serious injury with respect to stainless-steel bars and wire rods, and alloy tool steel in all forms;he does not make a determination with respect to the threat of serious injury, as he considers that a determination of threat of seriousinjury is unnecessary in view of his determination of serious injury.

¹ / Section 201(b)(2)(C) provides: “with respect to substantial cause, an increase in imports (either actual or relative to domestic production)and a decline in the proportion of the domestic market supplied by domestic producers.”

² / Section 201(b)(4) provides: “For purposes of this section, the term 'substantial cause’ means a cause which is important and not less thanany other cause.”

¹ / For a domestic industry to be eligible for import relief (which as used in this statement of views includes import restraints as well asadjustment assistance), the Trade Act essentially requires that three identifiable criteria be met:

(1) Imports of the articles concerned must be entering inincreased quantities. (2) The domestic industry producing articles like or directlycompetitive with the imported articles must be experiencing serious injury, or the threat thereof.(3) The increased imports referred to in 1 above must be a substantial cause of the injury, or threat thereof, referred to in 2 above.

¹ / Precedent for this carving out of distinct industries can be found in earlier Commission investigations. See, for example, my views inAsparagus; Report to the President on Investigation No. TA-201-4 …, USITC Publication 755, January 1976, pp. 7-8; and Bolts, Nuts, andScrews of Iron or Steel: Report to the President on Investigation No. TA-201-2 …, USITC Publication 747, November 1975, pp. 5-8.

¹ / For a discussion of the meaning of this criterion, see the text, infra.

¹ / See U.S. Senate, Committee on Finance, Trade Reform Act of 1974, S. Rept. No. 93-1298 (93d Cong., 2d sess.) 1974 (hereinafter FinanceReport).

² / For further discussion of the meaning of the term “increased imports,” and, among other things, the relevant time period, see the Statement ofReasons of Chairman Leonard in Birch Plywood Doorskins; Report to the President on Investigation No. TA-201-1…, USITC Publication 743,October 1975, pp. 9-12.

¹ / The European Economic Community and Japan were parties to this first informal agreement.

² / The United Kingdom, Japan, and the European Economic Community were parties to this second informal agreement.

³ / In addition to the VRA, other causes of nonmarket distortions tending to reduce the level of Imports and mask a realistic trend included severalinvestigations in which less-than-fair-value sales of stainless steel were found by the Department of the Treasury, a worldwide nickel strike, two recessions,two devaluations of the U.S. dollar, and domestic price controls.

¹ / For a more detailed discussion of the concept of “serious injury” and the concept of “threat“* see the views of Chairman Leonard in Bolts, Nuts,and Screws of Iron or Steel, supra note 1, p. 16at pp. 9-12.

¹ / See the report of the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and Means, Trade Reform Act of 1973, H. Rept. No. 93-571 (93d Cong.,1st sess.), 1973, at p. 47 (hereinafter Ways and Means Committee Report); see also the Finance Report, supra note 1, p. 20, at p. 121.

² / Ways and Means Committee Report, supra, at p. 47.

¹ / See the Ways and Means Committee Report, supra note 1, p. 23, at pp. 46-47, and the Finance Committee Report, supra note 1, p. 20, atpp. 120-121.

² / See the Ways and Means Committee Report, supra note 1, p. 23, at pp. 46-47.

³ / Id, at p. 46.

¹ / Supra note 1, p.20.

¹ /Ways and Means Committee Report, supra note 1, p. 23, at p. 47.

² /Finance Committee Report, supra note 1, p. 20, at p. 121.

¹ / Trade Reform Act of 1974; Report of the Committee on Finance . .77 S. Rept. 93-1298 (93d Cong., 2d sess.), 1974.

¹ / Ingots, blooms, billets, slabs, and sheet bars have not been discussed in terms of an industry. Not only have these articles not beenimported into the United States in increased quantities, but they are not produced by the four industries we are considering, and could have noimpact. For a more complete explanation see the Views of Chairman Leonard in this case.

¹ / See statement of reasons of Vice Chairman Minchew in Birch Plywood” Doorskins: Report to the President on Investigation No. TA-201-1 …,USITC Publication 743 /October/ 1975.

¹ / See statement of reasons of Vice Chairman Minchew in Birch Plywood Doorskins; Report to the President on Investigation No. TA-201-1 …,USITC Publication 743, /October/ 1975.

² / The criterion of increased” imports not having been met, it is unnecessary to consider stainless-steel sheet and strip any further.The determination on this article is negative.

¹ / Because the criterion of serious injury or threat of serious injury is not met, it is unnecessary for me to consider the stainless-steelplate industry further.

¹ / Report of the House Committee on Ways and Means (H. Rept. No. 93-571) p. 46.

¹ / U.S. Senate, Report of the Committee on Finance, Trade Reform Act of 1974 (S. Rept. No. 93-1298) p. 121 and 122.

¹ / For a statement of the legal and policy arguments of a Commissioner participating in the recommendation of a Commission remedy see theadditional views of Vice Chairman Daniel Minchew with regard to recommendations of remedy in Asparagus: Report to the President on InvestigationNo. TA-201-4 under section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974.

¹ / Brief on behalf of the Tool and Stainless Steel Industry Committee for Import Relief (November 25, 1975), p. 7.

² / Ibid.

¹ / Trade Reform Act of 1974…, S. Rept. No. 9~3-1298 (93d Cong., 2d sess.) 1974, at p. 120.

¹ /See, e.g., Ceramic fable and Kitchen Articles, Including Dinnerware … . TEA-I-22 … TC Publication 406, 1971; Bagatelle,Billiard, and Pool Balls … TEA-I-19 … TC Publication 374, 1971; Nonrubber Footwear … TEA-I-18 … TC Publication 359, 1971 (CommissionersClubb and Moore) at pp. 10-11 (Commissioner Leonard) at p. 37.

¹ / See Antifriction Balls and Ball Bearings, Including Ball Bearings With Integral Shafts, and Parts Thereof … TEA-I-27 … TC Publication597, 1973.

^* [Reproduced from the United States Federal Register, Vol. 41, No. 54(March 18, 1976), p. 11269.]