Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Marathon Oil Comp v. Ruhrgas, 96-20361 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 96-20361 Visitors: 54
Filed: Jun. 25, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 96-20361 _ MARATHON OIL COMPANY, MARATHON INTERNATIONAL OIL COMPANY, and MARATHON PETROLEUM NORGE A/S, Plaintiffs-Appellants/ Cross-Appellees, VERSUS A.G. RUHRGAS, Defendant-Appellee/ Cross-Appellant. _ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas _ June 25, 1999 ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Before KING, Chief Judge, POLITZ, JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, JONES, SMITH, DUHÉ
More
                IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                         FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                            _______________

                              No. 96-20361
                            _______________



                         MARATHON OIL COMPANY,

                 MARATHON INTERNATIONAL OIL COMPANY,

                                      and

                     MARATHON PETROLEUM NORGE A/S,

                                                Plaintiffs-Appellants/
                                                Cross-Appellees,

                                     VERSUS

                               A.G. RUHRGAS,

                                                Defendant-Appellee/
                                                Cross-Appellant.

                       _________________________

            Appeals from the United States District Court
                  for the Southern District of Texas
                       _________________________
                             June 25, 1999

                           ON REMAND FROM
               THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before KING, Chief Judge, POLITZ, JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS,
JONES, SMITH, DUHÉ, WIENER, BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS,
BENAVIDES, STEWART, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:



     This   court,   sitting    en    banc,   reversed   and    remanded   the

judgment of the district court.             See Marathon Oil Co. v. A.G.

Ruhrgas, 
145 F.3d 211
(5th Cir. 1998) (en banc).         The Supreme Court

reversed and remanded the judgment of this court.              See Ruhrgas AG
v. Marathon Oil Co., 
119 S. Ct. 1563
(1999).

      This matter is REMANDED to the panel that originally decided

it.   See Marathon Oil Co. v. Ruhrgas, A.G., 
115 F.3d 315
, 318 (5th

Cir. 1997). The motion to recall mandate is DENIED as unnecessary.

The motion to expedite appeal is CARRIED WITH THE CASE, for

consideration by the panel.




                                 2

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer