Marathon Oil Comp v. Ruhrgas

182 F.3d 291

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _______________

No. 96-20361 _______________

MARATHON OIL COMPANY,

MARATHON INTERNATIONAL OIL COMPANY,

and

MARATHON PETROLEUM NORGE A/S,

Plaintiffs-Appellants/ Cross-Appellees,

VERSUS

A.G. RUHRGAS,

Defendant-Appellee/ Cross-Appellant.

_________________________

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas _________________________ June 25, 1999

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

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

PER CURIAM:

This court, sitting en banc, reversed and remanded the

judgment of the district court. See Marathon Oil Co. v. A.G.

Ruhrgas, 145 F.3d 211 (5th Cir. 1998) (en banc). The Supreme Court

reversed and remanded the judgment of this court. See Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 119 S. Ct. 1563 (1999).

This matter is REMANDED to the panel that originally decided

it. See Marathon Oil Co. v. Ruhrgas, A.G., 115 F.3d 315, 318 (5th

Cir. 1997). The motion to recall mandate is DENIED as unnecessary.

The motion to expedite appeal is CARRIED WITH THE CASE, for

consideration by the panel.