Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.

Summarize Case

Related Cases

Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.
Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.
No. 02-428
Dastar Corp. v. Random House, Inc.
Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, a Delaware Corporation Sfm Entertainment Llc, a Delaware Limited Liability Company New Line Home Video Inc., a New York Corporation, Plaintiffs-Counter-Defendants-Appellees v. Entertainment Distributing, an Oregon Corporation Marathon Music & Video, an Oregon Corporation, Dastar Corporation, an Oregon Corporation, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellant, Random House, Inc., Sued as Doubleday, a Division of Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc., Counter-Defendant-Appellee. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, a Delaware Corporation Sfm Entertainment Llc, a Delaware Limited Liability Company New Line Home Video Inc., a New York Corporation, Plaintiffs-Counter-Defendants-Appellees v. Entertainment Distributing, an Oregon Corporation Marathon Music & Video, an Oregon Corporation, Dastar Corporation, an Oregon Corporation, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellant, Random House, Inc., Sued as Doubleday, a Division of Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc., Counter-Defendant-Appellee. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, a Delaware Corporation Sfm Entertainment Llc, a Delaware Limited Liability Company New Line Home Video Inc., a New York Corporation, Plaintiffs-Counter-Defendants-Appellees v. Entertainment Distributing, an Oregon Corporation Marathon Music & Video, an Oregon Corporation, Dastar Corporation, an Oregon Corporation, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellant, Random House, Inc., Sued as Doubleday, a Division of Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc., Counter-Defendant-Appellee

537 U.S. 1231

DASTAR CORP.
v.
TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX FILM CORP. ET AL.

No. 02-428.

Supreme Court of United States.

March 3, 2003.

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT.

C. A. 9th Cir. [Certiorari granted, ante, p. 1099.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted. JUSTICE BREYER took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.