Legal Opinion
United States v. Baroid Corp.
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided November 19, 2004No. CIV.A.93-2621 (RCL)PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
LAMBERTH, District Judge.
Defendant Smith International, Inc. (“Smith”) has moved the Court for an order construing its obligations under the Modified Final Judgment entered in this case by Judge Sporkin on September 19, 1996. After Anchor Drilling Fluids U.S.A., Inc. (“Anchor”), a party to the Modified Final Judgment, filed its opposition and Smith filed its reply, Anchor moved for leave to file a surreply. Now before the Court are the motion for leave to file a surreply and the motion for a construal order. For the reasons set forth herein, the Court denies the motion for…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Riggs v. Johnson CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1868
- Lewis v. RumsfeldDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2001
- United States Ex Rel. Pogue v. Diabetes Treatment Centers of America, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2002
- United States v. Microsoft Corp.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1998
- Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority to the Use and Benefit of Head Construction Company v. Mergentime Corporation, (Two Cases)Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Flanagan v. Wyndham International Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2005
- Paleteria La Michoacana, Inc. v. Productos Lacteos Tocumbo S.A. De C.V.District Court, District of Columbia · 2017
- Ferguson v. Local 689, Amalgamated Transit UnionDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2009
- Banks v. KramerDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2009
- Robinson v. Ergo Solutions, LLCDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.