Legal Opinion
Vivitar Corp. v. United States
United States Court of International Trade
Decided April 4, 1984No. Court 84-1-00067PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RESTANI, Judge:
In the present mandamus action, 47th Street Photo and K Mart Corporation (K Mart) move pursuant to Rules 24(a)(2) and 24(b) of the Court of International Trade for intervention as a matter of right, or alternatively, for permissive intervention. For the following reasons, 47th Street Photo’s application for intervention is granted as of right, and K Mart is granted leave to participate as amicus curiae pursuant to Rule 76 of this court.
Rule 24(a)(2) of the court’s rules provides upon timely application of non-statutory 1 absolute right to intervene. 2
Various factors must be…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Donaldson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- William E. Nuesse, Commissioner of Banks, State of Wisconsin v. William Camp, Comptroller of the CurrencyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1967
- Cascade Natural Gas Corp. v. El Paso Natural Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Bell & Howell: Mamiya Co. v. Masel Supply Co. Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1983
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Coalition to Preserve the Integrity of American Trademarks v. United StatesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1984
- Olympus Corp. v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1985
- Manuli Autoadesivi, S.P.A. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1985
- Luxury International, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1999
- Auxin Solar, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2024
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.