Case Name: RHP BEARINGS, LTD., NSK Bearings Europe Ltd., and NSK Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, and The Barden Corporation, the Barden Corporation (U.K.) Ltd., and FAG Bearings Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee, and The Torrington Company, Defendant-Cross Appellant; RHP Bearings, Ltd., NSK Bearings Europe Ltd., and NSK Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellees, and The Barden Corporation, the Barden Corporation (U.K.) Ltd., and FAG Bearings Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. United States, Defendant-Appellant, and The Torrington Company, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-02-17
Citations: 89 F. App'x 246
Docket Number: Nos. 02-1017, 02-1089, 02-1090, 02-1088
Parties: RHP BEARINGS, LTD., NSK Bearings Europe Ltd., and NSK Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, and The Barden Corporation, the Barden Corporation (U.K.) Ltd., and FAG Bearings Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee, and The Torrington Company, Defendant-Cross Appellant. RHP Bearings, Ltd., NSK Bearings Europe Ltd., and NSK Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellees, and The Barden Corporation, the Barden Corporation (U.K.) Ltd., and FAG Bearings Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. United States, Defendant-Appellant, and The Torrington Company, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 89
Pages: 246–246

Head Matter:
RHP BEARINGS, LTD., NSK Bearings Europe Ltd., and NSK Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, and The Barden Corporation, the Barden Corporation (U.K.) Ltd., and FAG Bearings Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee, and The Torrington Company, Defendant-Cross Appellant. RHP Bearings, Ltd., NSK Bearings Europe Ltd., and NSK Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellees, and The Barden Corporation, the Barden Corporation (U.K.) Ltd., and FAG Bearings Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. United States, Defendant-Appellant, and The Torrington Company, Defendant-Appellee.
Nos. 02-1017, 02-1089, 02-1090, 02-1088.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
Feb. 17, 2004.
Max F. Schutzman, Mark E. Pardo, Adam M. Dambrov, Mark E. Pardo, Grunfeld, Desiderio, New York, NY, Joseph A. Konizeski, Lipstein, Jaffe, Robert A. Lipstein, Grace W. Lawson, Crowell & Moring, Jeffrey S. Grimson, Grunfeld, Desiderio, Washington, DC, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
Wesley K. Caine, Lane S. Hurewitz, Geert Deprest, Stewart and Stewart, Ada E. Bosque, Lucius B. Lau, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendants-Cross Appellants.
Matthew P. Jaffe, Crowell & Moring, Washington, DC, for Plaintiffs-Appellants/Plaintiffs.
Terence P. Stewart, Stewart and Stewart, Velta A. Melnbrencis, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendants-Cross Appellants/Defendants.

Opinion:
ORDER
Upon consideration of the parties' unopposed motions to sever and voluntarily dismiss appeals 02-1017, -1089, and -1090,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) The motions are granted. All sides shall bear their own costs in appeals 02-1017, -1089, -1090.
(2) The United States is requested to inform this court, within 14 days, how it believe appeal 02-1088 should proceed.
(3) The revised official captions are reflected above.