LEBMAN

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (21 total)

• Timberlane Lumber Co. v. Bank OF Am., 549 F.2d 597 (9th Cir. 1976)
  …to dismiss based on the act of state doctrine raises such a Rule 12(b)(6) objection, not a jurisdictional defect. Occidental Petroleum Corp. v. Buttes Gas & Oil Co., 331 F.Supp. 92, 113 (C.D.Cal.1971), aff’d, 461 F. 2d 1261 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 950, 93 S.Ct. 272, 34 L.Ed.2d 221 (1972). However, it is also true that summary judgment treatment under Rule 56 is not required for a Rule 12(b)(1) “speaking motion.” 2A Moore’s Federal Practice K12.09[3], at 2297-2300, 2313 (2d ed. 1975). Therefore,…

  ← 1 / 5 →
• Mannington Mills, Inc. v. Congoleum Corp., 595 F.2d 1287 (3d Cir. 1979)
  …f. See, e. g., Continental Ore Co. v. Union Carbide & Carbon Corp., supra, 370 U.S. at 706, 82 S.Ct. 1404; Occidental Petroleum Corp. v. Buttes Gas & Oil Co., 331 F.Supp. 92 (C.D. Cal.1971), aff’d per curiam, 461 F. 2d 1261 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 950, 93 S.Ct. 272, 34 L.Ed.2d 221 (1972). Thus, by issuance of the patents per se, the foreign governments did not force the defendant to exclude the plaintiff from the foreign markets and the defense of compulsion is not available. The case sub judice…
• Hunt v. Mobil OIL Corp., 550 F.2d 68 (2d Cir. 1977)
  …omplaint is not within any of the cases which have applied the doctrine. A similar argument was raised in Occidental Petroleum Corp. v. Buttes Gas & Oil Co., 331 F.Supp. 92 (C.D. Cal. 1971), aff’d per curiam, 461 F. 2d 1261 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 950, 221 S.Ct. 272, 34 L.Ed.2d 221 (1972) relied upon by Judge Weinfeld [*76] below as a case which involved facts substantially parallel to those in the instant case. 410 F.Supp. at 24. Occidental involved an alleged antitrust conspiracy to restrain an…

  ← 1 / 2 →