Case ID: f-appx_98/html/0865-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

FAG KUGELFISCHER GEORG SCHAFER AG and Fag Bearings Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellees, and SKF USA Inc. and Skf GmbH, Plaintiffs-Appellants, and NTN Bearings Corporation of America and Ntn Kugellagerfabrik (Deutschland) GmbH, Plaintiffs, and INA Walzlager Schaeffler KG (now known as INA Walzlager Schaeffler oHG) and INA Bearings Company, Inc. (now known as INA USA Corporation), Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee, and The Torrington Company, (now known as Timken U.S. Corporation), Defendant-Appellee. FAG Kugelfischer Georg Schafer AG and FAG Bearings Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellees, and SKF USA INC. and SKF GmbH, Plaintiffs-Appellees, and NTN Bearings Corporation of America and NTN Kugellagerfabrik (Deutschland) GmbH, Plaintiffs, and INA Walzlager Schaffler KG (now known as INA Walzlager Schaeffler oHG) and INA Bearings Company, Inc. (now known as INA USA Corporation), Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. United States, Defendant-Appellant, and The Torrington Company, (now known as Timken U.S. Corporation), Defendant-Appellant.
    Nos. 01-1625, 02-1097, 02-1096, 02-1099.
    United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
    May 4, 2004.
    Max F. Schutzman, Principal Attorney, Grunfeld, Desiderio, New York, NY, Stephen L. Gibson, Principal Attorney, Sonnenschein Nath, Herbert C. Shelley, Principal Attorney, Steptoe & Johnson, Washington, DC, for Plaintiffs-Appellees.
    Donald J. Unger, Principal Attorney, Barnes, Richardson, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiffs.
    Terence P. Stewart, Principal Attorney, Stewart and Stewart, Velta A. Melnbrends, Principal Attorney, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendant Appellant.
   ORDER

Upon consideration of SKF USA Inc. et al.’s unopposed motion to voluntarily dismiss 01-1625, INA Walzlager Schaeffler KG et al.’s unopposed motion to voluntarily dismiss appeal 02-1097, and the United States’ and The Torrington Company’s responses to this court’s February 17, 2004 order,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The stay of proceedings is lifted and the motions to dismiss 01-1625 and 02-1097 are granted. All sides shall bear their own costs in 01-1625, 02-1097.

(2) The revised official captions are reflected above.

(3) The United States’ opening brief and The Torrington Company’s opening brief in 02-1096, -1099 are due within 60 days of the date of filing of this order.

(4) Any response briefs in 02-1096, - 1099 are due within 40 days of the latter date of service of the appellants’ opening briefs.

(5) The appellants’ reply briefs in 02-1096, -1099 are due within 25 days of the latter date of service of any response briefs.