Izumi Seimitsu Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha v. U. S. Philips Corp.

PETITIONER: Izumi Seimitsu Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha
RESPONDENT: U. S. Philips Corp. et al.
LOCATION: U.S. Penitentiary Terre Haute

DOCKET NO.: 92-1123
DECIDED BY: Rehnquist Court (1993-1994)
LOWER COURT: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

CITATION: 510 US 27 (1993)
ARGUED: Oct 12, 1993
DECIDED: Nov 30, 1993

ADVOCATES:
Garrard R. Beeney - on behalf of the Respondents
Herbert H. Mintz - on behalf of the Petitioner
Jay M. Smyser - for the Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc., as amicus curiae urging affirmance
Thomas G. Hungar - on behalf of the United States, as amicus curiae, supporting Respondents

Facts of the case

Question

Media for Izumi Seimitsu Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha v. U. S. Philips Corp.

Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - October 12, 1993 in Izumi Seimitsu Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha v. U. S. Philips Corp.

Audio Transcription for Opinion Announcement - November 30, 1993 in Izumi Seimitsu Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha v. U. S. Philips Corp.

William H. Rehnquist:

I have the opinions of the Court to announce in two cases.

The first is No. 92-1123, Izumi Seimitsu Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha versus the Philips Corporation, and this case was argued in October and the question presented in the petition for certiorari was a challenge to the practice of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in ordering the lower Court judgment dismissed where the parties it settled the case on appeal.

After argument and we decided that in order to reach that question, we would first have to reach a question which was not presented in the petition for certiorari and that was whether or not the Federal Court had properly denied the motion of Izumi to intervene at the appellate stage and having so concluded, I am declining to reach that question, which was not presented.

The writ of certiorari has dismissed as improvingly granted.

Justice Stevens has filed the dissenting opinion which Justice Blackmun joins.