1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 723 F.2d
  5. 723 F.2d 238 (1983)
 

IN RE JAPANESE ELECTRONIC PRODUCTS

Nos. 81-2331 to 81-2333.

723 F.2d 238 (1983)

In re JAPANESE ELECTRONIC PRODUCTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION (D.C. MDL No. 189). ZENITH RADIO CORPORATION, Appellant, v. MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO., LTD., et al. (D.C.Civ. No. 74-2451). In re JAPANESE ELECTRONIC PRODUCTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION (D.C. MDL No. 189). NATIONAL UNION ELECTRIC CORPORATION, Appellant, v. MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO., LTD., et al. (D.C.Civ. No. 74-3247). In re JAPANESE ELECTRONIC PRODUCTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION (D.C. MDL No. 189). ZENITH RADIO CORPORATION v. MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO., LTD., et al. (D.C.Civ. No. 74-2451). NATIONAL UNION ELECTRIC CORPORATION v. MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO., LTD., et al. (D.C.Civ. No. 74-3247) Mitsubishi Electric Corporation ("MELCO"), Appellant.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Decided December 5, 1983.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Edwin P. Rome (argued), Morris L. Weisberg, William H. Roberts, Arnold I. Kalman, Kathleen Herzog Larkin, Norman E. Greenspan, Margaret B. Dardess, Blank, Rome, Comisky & McCauley, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellants, Zenith Radio Corp. and Nat. Union Elec. Corp.; Philip J. Curtis, John Borst, Jr., Zenith Radio Corp., Glenview, Ill., of counsel.

Asa D. Sokolow (argued), Renee J. Roberts, Brian G. Lustbader, Rosenman, Colin, Freund, Lewis & Cohen, Joshua F. Greenberg, Randolph S. Sherman, Kaye, Scholer, Fierman, Hays & Handler, New York City, Franklin Poul, Wolf, Block, Schorr & Solis-Cohen, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellees, Sony Corp. and Sony Corp. of America.

Louis A. Lehr, Jr. (argued), Stanley M. Lipnick, John L. Ropiequet, Carol R. Kanter, Arnstein, Gluck & Lehr, Chicago, Ill., Harry A. Short, Jr., Liebert, Short, Fitzpatrick & Lavin, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee, Sears, Roebuck and Co.; Philip M. Knox, Jr., Charles A. Tausche, Ann M. Coons, Law Dept., Sears, Roebuck and Co., Chicago, Ill., of counsel.

Thomas P. Coffey (argued), E. Houston Harsha, Karl F. Nygren, Chicago, Ill., for appellee, Motorola, Inc.; Kirkland & Ellis, Chicago, Ill., of counsel.

Henry T. Reath (argued), Terry R. Broderick, Duane, Morris & Heckscher, Philadelphia, Pa., Hoken S. Seki, Seki, Jarvis & Lynch, Chicago, Ill., John T. Dolan, Arnold B. Calmann, Crummy, Del Deo, Dolan & Purcell, Newark, N.J., for appellee, Mitsubishi Elec. Corp.

Charles F. Schirmeister (argued), Charles Z. Krueger, Reid & Priest, New York City, Thomas N. O'Neill, Jr., Montgomery, McCracken, Walker & Rhoads, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellees, Mitsubishi Corp. and Mitsubishi Intern. Corp.

Donald J. Zoeller (argued), Mudge, Rose, Guthrie & Alexander, New York City, Drinker, Biddle & Reath, Philadelphia, Pa., Liaison Counsel for appellees and for Toshiba defendants.

Whitman & Ransom, New York City, Hunt, Kerr, Bloom, Hitchner, O'Brien & Conrad, Philadelphia, Pa., for Sanyo appellees.

Kirkland & Ellis, Chicago, Ill., Obermayer, Rebmann, Maxwell & Hippel, Philadelphia, Pa., for Motorola appellee.

Wender, Murase & White, New York City, Dechert, Price & Rhoads, Philadelphia, Pa., for the Sharp appellees.

Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, Philadelphia, Pa., Ira M. Millstein (argued), A. Paul Victor, Joel B. Harris (argued), Weil, Gotshal & Manges, New York City, for Matsushita appellees.

William H. Barrett, Carl W. Schwarz, Metzger, Shadyac & Schwarz, Washington, D.C., for Hitachi, Ltd., Hitachi Kaden Hanbai Kabushiki Kaisha and Hitachi Sales Corp. of America.

H. William Tanaka, Lawrence R. Walders and B. Jenkins Middleton, Tanaka, Walders & Ritger, Washington, D.C., for Hitachi, Ltd., et al.

Before SEITZ, Chief Judge, GIBBONS and MESKILL, Circuit Judges.

                         INDEX

I.   The Parties and the Charges                   251

II.  Proceedings to Date                           252
     A. Preliminary Substantive Rulings            252
     B. Preliminary Procedural and Evidentiary
        Rulings                                    255
     C. The Summary Judgment Ruling                256

III. Scope of Review                               257

IV.  The Trial Court Did Not Err in Considering...

                    
                    
                    

                        

                            

                                
                            

                            

                                

                                    
    
                                        
  1. 
                                        
  2. 
                                        
  3. 
                                    

                                

                                

                                    
Let's get started

                                

                                

                                    

                                    Leagle.com
                                    

                                    Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting 
                                    

                                        Sign on now to see your case. 
                                        

                                        Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
                                        

                                        
    
                                            
  • Updated daily.
    • 
                                            
  • Uncompromising quality.
    • 
                                            
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.
    •

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases