judyrecords
600 million+
United States Court Cases

Nevada Supreme/Appellate Court Record

UNITED STATES METALS VS. LEMELSON MEDICAL

Case Information: 36416
Short Caption:UNITED STATES METALS VS. LEMELSON MEDICALCourt:Supreme Court
Lower Court Case(s):Washoe Co. - Second Judicial District - CV9902216Classification:Civil Appeal - General - Other
Disqualifications:Case Status:Remittitur Issued/Case Closed
Replacement:Panel Assigned: En Banc
To SP/Judge:07/27/2000 / Gruesen, ThomasSP Status:Completed
Oral Argument:02/13/2002 at 9:00 AMOral Argument Location:Carson City
Submission Date:02/13/2002How Submitted:After Oral Argument

+ Party Information

Docket Entries
DateTypeDescriptionPending?Document
07/13/2000Filing FeeReceived Filing Fee Paid on Filing. $200.00 from McDonald firm-check no. 26780.
07/13/2000Notice of Appeal DocumentsFiled Certified Copy of Notice of Appeal. Appeal docketed in the Supreme Court this day. 00-12059
07/21/2000Notice/OutgoingIssued Notice to Transmit Required Document. Judgment filed July 5, 2000, and Notice of Entry of Order. Due Date: 10 days
07/26/2000Order/IncomingFiled District Court Order. Certified copy of order filed in district court on July 5, 2000; and Notice of Entry of Order filed July 7, 2000. 00-12969
07/27/2000Settlement NoticeIssued Notice: Assignment to Settlement Program. Settlement Judge: Thomas W. Gruesen, Sr. (Briefing and preparation of transcripts and docketing statement suspended pending further order of this court.)
08/23/2000Settlement Program ReportFiled Interim Settlement Program Report. The settlement conference is continued to the following date: October 4, 2000. 00-14820
10/10/2000Settlement Program ReportFiled Interim Settlement Program Report. The parties were unable to agree to a settlement of this matter. 00-17912
10/10/2000Notice/OutgoingIssued Notice to File Docketing Statement. (Docketing statement mailed to counsel for appellant.) Due Date: 15 days
10/19/2000Settlement Order/ProceduralFiled Order: No Settlement/Briefing Reinstated. The parties were unable to agree to a settlement of this appeal. Upon the filing of the docketing statement, this court shall conduct a preliminary jurisdictional review of this appeal. Appellant: 15 days to comply with NRAP 9(a); 120 days to file and serve opening brief and appendix. Briefing shall proceed in accordance with NRAP 31(a)(1). 00-18535
10/20/2000Docketing StatementFiled Docketing Statement. 00-18647
11/02/2000Transcript RequestFiled Certificate of No Transcript Request. 00-19281
01/10/2001Notice/IncomingFiled Substitution of Attorneys. Morris Pickering in place and stead of Schreck Morris as co-counsel of record for respondents. 01-00556
02/05/2001Letter/IncomingFiled Letter. from attorney Ann Morgan of Jones Vargas law firm requesting that her name be added as counsel for respondents. 01-02333
02/12/2001BriefFiled Opening Brief. Mailed on: Hand delivered 02/12/01. 01-02760
02/12/2001AppendixFiled Joint Appendix. Volumes 1 through 3. 01-02761
03/14/2001MotionFiled Motion and Order Extending Time. Brief due: April 13, 2001. 01-04568
03/14/2001MotionFiled Motion to Strike. Respondents' Motion to Strike Non-Conforming Brief. 01-04570
03/23/2001MotionFiled Response to Motion. Appellant's Opposition to Respondents' Motion to Strike Non-Conforming Brief or, in the Alternative, Motion to File Brief in Excess of Thirty Pages. 01-05127
04/12/2001MotionFiled Motion to Extend Time. 01-06376
04/13/2001Other Other. Filed Original Signature Pages and Original Affidavit of Steve Morris to Respondents' Motion for Extension of Time. 01-06445
04/17/2001Order/ProceduralFiled Order. On March 14, 2001, respondents filed a motion to strike the opening brief. On March 23, 2001, appellant filed an opposition. Our review of the opening brief indicated that appellant used a font size that approximates 15 chacters per inch and is therefore not in compliance with NRAP 32(a). We deny respondents' motion to strike. Respondents may file an answering brief of up to 41 pages without filing a motion for leave to file an oversized answering brief. We grant respondents' motion filed on April 12, 2001. Respondents shall have to and including May 18, 2001, to file and serve the answering brief. 01-06590
05/16/2001MotionFiled Motion to Extend Time. Respondents' Motion for Extension of time to file their Answering Brief and Motion for Leave to file Brief in Excess of the Page Limit (additional 20 pages). 01-08131
05/18/2001Order/Clerk'sFiled Clerk's Order Granting Motion. filed May 16, 2001. Respondents shall have to and including May 23, 2001, to file and serve a joint answering brief that is 61 pages in length. 01-08296
05/18/2001MotionFiled Motion. Appellant's Consent to Respondents' Motion for Extension of Time to File Answering Brief and Motion for Leave to File a Brief in Excess of the Page Limit. 01-08344
05/23/2001BriefFiled Answering Brief. Joint Answering Brief. Mailed on: Hand delivered 05/23/01 (Reno/Carson). 01-08674
06/13/2001MotionFiled Stipulation and Order. Brief due: July 25, 2001. 01-09937
07/25/2001BriefFiled Reply Brief. Mailed on: Hand delivered 07/25/01. 01-12608
12/21/2001Notice/OutgoingIssued Notice Scheduling Oral Argument. Oral Argument is scheduled for 30 minutes in Carson City on February 13, 2002, at 9:00 a.m. (En Banc)
01/28/2002Notice/OutgoingIssued Oral Argument Reminder Notice.
02/13/2002Case Status Update Submitted for Decision. Argued by: William A.S. Magrath II for Appellant and Bruce S. Sperling for Respondents. EN BANC
09/05/2002Order/DispositionalFiled Order of Affirmance. "AFFIRM the judgment of the district court." EN BANC. Rose, J., with whom Leavitt, J., agrees, dissenting. 02-15254
09/23/2002Filing FeeReceived Filing Fee Paid on Filing. $100 from McDonald, Carano firm -check no. 40136.
09/23/2002Post-Judgment PetitionFiled Petition for Rehearing. Hand Delivered 09/23/02. 02-16493
09/25/2002Notice/IncomingFiled Errata. Errata to petition for rehearing. 02-16642
10/30/2002Post-Judgment OrderFiled Order/Rehearing Denied. "Rehearing denied." NRAP 40(c). fn1[This appeal was decided by the en banc court in the first instance. En banc reconsideration is limited to review of panel decisions. NRAP 40A(b). Accordingly, we also deny appellant's petition for en banc reconsideration.] En Banc-Young, Shearing, Agosti, and Becker, JJ. Rose, J., with whom Maupin, C.J., and Leavitt, J., agree, dissenting. 02-18657
11/26/2002RemittiturIssued Remittitur. 02-18867
11/26/2002Case Status Update Remittitur Issued/Case Closed.
12/20/2002RemittiturFiled Remittitur. Received by County Clerk on December 2, 2002. 02-18867