The Dow Chemical Co.

5 Cited authorities

  1. United States v. W. T. Grant Co.

    345 U.S. 629 (1953)   Cited 2,263 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, although defendant had "disclaimed any intention" to revive the challenged conduct, "[s]uch a profession does not suffice to make a case moot although it is one of the factors to be considered in determining the appropriateness of granting an injunction against the now-discontinued acts"
  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Raytheon Co.

    398 U.S. 25 (1970)   Cited 74 times
    In NLRB v. Raytheon Co., 398 U.S. 25, 27, 90 S.Ct. 1547, 1549, 26 L.Ed.2d 21 (1970), the Supreme Court recognized that compliance did not necessarily render an enforcement proceeding moot.
  3. International Union of Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    289 F.2d 757 (D.C. Cir. 1960)   Cited 43 times

    No. 15384. Argued April 11, 1960. Decided June 30, 1960. Mr. Benjamin C. Sigal, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. David S. Davidson, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for petitioner. Miss Fannie M. Boyls, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, with whom Messrs. Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, National Labor Relations Board, and Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, National Labor Relations Board, were on the brief, for respondent. Before PRETTYMAN, Chief Judge, and BAZELON and

  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Grace Co.

    184 F.2d 126 (8th Cir. 1950)   Cited 43 times

    No. 14107. September 13, 1950. Mozart G. Ratner, Acting Assistant General Counsel, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. (David P. Findling, Associate General Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Assistant General Counsel, and Frederick U. Reel and Irving M. Herman, attorneys, all of Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. Burr S. Stottle, Kansas City, Mo. (Robert J. Ingraham, Kansas City, Mo., on the brief), for respondent. Clif. Langsdale, Kansas City, Mo. (John J. Manning, Kansas City

  5. Local 14055, United Steelworkers v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    524 F.2d 853 (D.C. Cir. 1975)   Cited 2 times

    No. 74-1632. Argued May 22, 1975. Decided December 15, 1975. Carl B. Frankel, with whom Michael H. Gottesman, Washington, D.C., was on the brief for petitioner. John H. Ferguson, Atty., N.L.R.B., with whom John S. Irving, Deputy Gen. Counsel, Patrick Hardin, Associate Gen. Counsel, and Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., were on the brief for respondent. William A. Jackson, with whom Robert E. Williams, was on the brief for intervenor, The Dow Chemical Co. Gerard C. Smetana, Chicago