From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Marathon Oil Co. v. Ruhrgas

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Nov 17, 1997
129 F.3d 746 (5th Cir. 1997)

Summary

granting rehearing en banc

Summary of this case from Marathon Oil Company v. Ruhrgas

Opinion

No. 96-20361.

November 17, 1997.

Clifton T. Hutchinson, J. Gregory Taylor, David John Schenck, Hughes Luce, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiffs-Appellants-Cross-Appellees.

Ben H. Sheppard, Jr., Guy Stanford Lipe, Michael John Mucchetti, Harry M. Reasoner, Vinson Elkins, Houston, TX, for Ruhrgas.

Peter Heidenberger, Thomas G. Corcoran, Jr., Berliner, Corcoran Rowe, Washington, DC, for Federal Republic of Germany, Amicus Curiae.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas; Melinda Harmon, Judge.

(Opinion June 10, 1997, 5 Cir., 1997, 115 F.3d 315)

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and KING, JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, JONES, SMITH, DUHE, WIENER, BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, STEWART, PARKER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.


A majority of judges in active service having determined, on the Court's own motion, to rehear this case en banc,

IT IS ORDERED that this cause shall be reheard by the Court en banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. The Clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.


Summaries of

Marathon Oil Co. v. Ruhrgas

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Nov 17, 1997
129 F.3d 746 (5th Cir. 1997)

granting rehearing en banc

Summary of this case from Marathon Oil Company v. Ruhrgas
Case details for

Marathon Oil Co. v. Ruhrgas

Case Details

Full title:MARATHON OIL COMPANY, MARATHON INTERNATIONAL OIL COMPANY, MARATHON…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Nov 17, 1997

Citations

129 F.3d 746 (5th Cir. 1997)

Citing Cases

Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co.

In its notice of removal, Ruhrgas asserted three bases for federal jurisdiction: diversity of citizenship,…

Marathon Oil Company v. Ruhrgas

We conclude that the court should proceed to consider the issue of subject-matter jurisdiction (even if that…