Legal Opinion
Ross-Hime Designs, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided March 13, 2013No. 11-201CPublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RCFC 26(e); Protective Order; Motion for Access to Protected Information; Proprietary Information; Competitive Decision-Maker; Restricted Information; Export Controls
OPINION AND ORDER
HEWITT, Chief Judge
I. Background
Ross-Hime Designs, Inc. (plaintiff or Ross-Hime), a Minnesota corporation specializing “in the design and prototyping of humanoid robotic systems,” brings this suit alleging that two robotic manipulators known as Robonaut 1 and Robonaut 2, which were developed by the United States (defendant or the government) acting through the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA),…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Ebay Inc. v. Mercexchange, L. L. C.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Novosteel Sa v. United States, and Bethlehem Steel Corporation and U.S. Steel Group, a Unit of Usx Corporation (Now Known as United States Steel Llc)Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- McAbee Construction, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- Coast Federal Bank, Fsb v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Hitkansut LLC, a Michigan Corporation, & Acceledyne Technologies, Ltd., LLC, a Michigan Corporation v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
- Silver Buckle Mines, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2014
- McAirlaids, Inc. v. Kimberly-Clark Corp.District Court, W.D. Virginia · 2014
- Arthur Rosengren v. Curtiss-Wright CorporationDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2020
- Deloitte Tax LLP v. MurrayDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2022
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.