Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Animal Sci. Prods. v. China Minmetals Corp.

Animal Sci. Prods. v. China Minmetals Corp.

United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

January 24, 2011, Argued; August 17, 2011, Filed

No. 10-2288

Opinion

 [*464]  CHAGARES, Circuit Judge.

Plaintiffs Animal Science Products, Inc. and Resco Products, Inc. appeal the District Court's dismissal of their First Amended Complaint, in part without prejudice, on the basis that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act of 1982 (the "FTAIA"), 15 U.S.C. § 6a. For the reasons that follow, we will vacate and remand.

The plaintiffs are domestic purchasers of "magnesite."2 The plaintiffs allege, on behalf of a putative class, that the defendants — Chinese producers and exporters of magnesite — engaged in a conspiracy since at least April 2000 to fix the price of magnesite that is exported to and sold in the United States. The plaintiffs allege that this conspiracy has impacted hundreds of millions of dollars of United States commerce. Based on these allegations, the plaintiffs assert federal claims pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §§ 4, 16, predicated on the defendants' alleged violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1.

The plaintiffs first initiated this action by filing a complaint on September 7, 2005. That complaint named seventeen Chinese business entities as defendants. Only five of those defendants are parties to this appeal, however, and these defendants are divided into two groups: (1) the China Minmetals defendants and (2) the Sinosteel defendants.3 After two years of litigation surrounding service of process issues, the plaintiffs moved for a default judgment on December 14, 2007. The China Minmetals defendants and the Sinosteel defendants responded, and moved to compel arbitration of the dispute in China pursuant to arbitration clauses contained in several of the magnesite sales contracts.

In an opinion dated December 30, 2008, the District Court dismissed all pending motions and dismissed the plaintiffs'  [**4] complaint on the ground that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute pursuant to the FTAIA, a basis raised sua sponte by the District Court. See Animal Science Prods., Inc. v. China  [*465]  Nat'l Metals & Minerals Imp. & Exp. Corp., 596 F. Supp. 2d 842 (D.N.J. 2008).4 The dismissal was without prejudice, and the District Court granted the plaintiffs leave to amend their complaint. The District Court instructed that

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

654 F.3d 462 *; 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 17046 **; 2011-2 Trade Cas. (CCH) P77,566

ANIMAL SCIENCE PRODUCTS, INC., Appellant v. CHINA MINMETALS CORPORATION; CHINA NATIONAL CO, LTD.; XIYANG GROUP; XIYANG (PACIFIC) IMPORT & EXPORT LTD. COMPANY; XIYANG REFRACTORY MATERIALS LTD COMPANY; XIYANG FIREPROOF MATERIALS LTD COMPANY; SINOSTEEL CORPORATION; SINOSTEEL TRADING COMPANY; LIAONING JIAYI METALS & MINERALS CO., LTD; LIAONING FOREIGN TRADE GENERAL CORPORATION; LIAONING JINDING MAGNESITE GROUP; DALIAN GOLDEN SUN IMPORT & EXPORT CORP.; HAICHENG HOUYING CORP. LTD; HAICHENG HUAYU GROUP IMPORT & EXPORT CO. LTD. (HUAZIYU); HAICHENG PAILOU MAGNESITE ORE CO. LTD.; YINGKOU HUACHEN (GROUP) CO LTD.

Subsequent History: US Supreme Court certiorari denied by China Minmetals Corp. v. Animal Sci. Prods., 132 S. Ct. 1744, 182 L. Ed. 2d 530, 2012 U.S. LEXIS 2141 (U.S., 2012)

US Supreme Court certiorari denied by Sinosteel Corp. v. Animal Sci. Prods., 132 S. Ct. 1744, 182 L. Ed. 2d 530, 2012 U.S. LEXIS 2234 (U.S., 2012)

Dismissed without prejudice by, Motion dismissed by, As moot Animal Sci. Prods. v. China Minmetals Corp., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102661 (D.N.J., July 24, 2014)

Prior History:  [**1] On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. (Civ. No. 05-cv-04376). District Judge: Hon. Garrett E. Brown, Jr.

Animal Sci. Prods. v. China Nat'l Metals & Minerals Imp. & Exp. Corp., 702 F. Supp. 2d 320, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35243 (D.N.J., 2010)

CORE TERMS

district court, commerce, import, subject matter jurisdiction, Sherman Act, defendants', antitrust, substantive merit, foreign nation, federal court, courts, export, rates, travel agent, foreseeable, adjudicate, retailers

Antitrust & Trade Law, International Aspects, Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act, Civil Procedure, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Jurisdiction Over Actions, General Overview, Private Actions, Remedies, Limited Jurisdiction, Constitutional Law, Congressional Duties & Powers, Commerce Clause, Governments, Courts, Judicial Precedent, Legislation, Interpretation, Defenses, Demurrers & Objections, Motions to Dismiss, Failure to State Claim, Evidence, Burdens of Proof, Allocation, Responses, Motions to Dismiss