Labels:book | reckoner | sky | tree OCR: Izumi now cites pad R. Cjv 24(a)(2) applicable only to the district courts toddns of its claim that should have beer permitted intervene the appeals. Rule 24(a}(2) however, 'obviously applies only significantly protectable interest Donatdson United States 400 U.S 517 531 {1971} Izumi has no such interest here First, Philips and Windmere have exchanged general and there no possibility of Izumi having indemnify Windmere the future the same clain Second although Izumi attempts C assert Sears interest the unfair competition judgment. Sears did not object the joint motion to vacate. and wa apparently content ansind it5 appeal the Federal Circuit of the order reinstating Philips unfair competition claim Third. Izumi's alleged interest ir using the antitrust judgment offensively against Philips b ...
(.png)
