Cases

McKAY, Circuit Judge. In these consolidated appeals, Relator-Appellant Jack Grynberg appeals the district court’s dismissal of a large number of coordinated qui tam cases Relator had brought against numerous natural gas pipelines and other companies involved in measuring natural gas produced from federal or Indian lands.1 The district court dismissed the cases for lack of subject matte

MATHESON, Circuit Judge. This is the second appeal in a qui tam case lasting over 20 years and initially involving more than 300 natural gas industry defendants. The number of defendants has shrunk significantly, and the issues on this appeal present narrow questions. Specifically, Relator and Appellant Jack J. Grynberg appeals two district court orders awarding attorney fees. First, Mr. Grynberg

562 F.3d 1032 (2009) In re NATURAL GAS ROYALTIES Qui Tam Litigation, Jack J. Grynberg, ex rel. United States, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Pacific Gas Transmission Company, n/k/a Gas Transmission Northwest Corporation; KN Energy, Inc.; Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Company; TCP Gathering Co.; KN Interstate Gas Transmission Co.; KN Natural Gas, Inc.; Northern Gas Company; Westar Transmission Company; Wildhorse Energy

OPINION 1 Opinion by Justice RODRIGUEZ. This is an appeal from a summary judgment entered in a bill of review proceeding. Appellants Celeste Grynberg and Jack J. Grynberg d/b/a Grynberg Petroleum appeal the denial of their petition for bill of review, which sought to overturn a

329 S.W.3d 628 (2010) WOLF HOLLOW I, L.P., Appellant, v. EL PASO MARKETING, L.P. and Enterprise Texas Pipeline, LLC, Appellees. No. 14-09-00118-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston (14th Dist.). October 28, 2010. Rehearing Overruled December 16, 2010. *631 Jett Williams III, Jacks C. Nickens, Houston, for appel

467 F.Supp.2d 1117 (2006) In re: NATURAL GAS ROYALTIES QUI TAM LITIGATION No. 99-MD-1293-D. United States District Court, D. Wyoming. October 20, 2006. *1118 *1119 *1120 *1121 *1122

Affirmed in Part as Modified, Reversed and Remanded in Part, and Opinion filed October 28, 2010. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

MATHESON, Circuit Judge. Celeste C. Grynberg — individually and as trustee on behalf of the Rachel Susan Trust, Stephen Mark Trust, and Miriam Zela Trust — and Jack J. Grynberg petitioned the federal district court to vacate an arbitration award that had been entered against them and in favor of Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P. (“KMEP”) and Kinder Morgan C02 Company, L.P. (“K

817 F.Supp. 1338 (1993) GRYNBERG PRODUCTION CORPORATION v. BRITISH GAS, P.L.C., British Petroleum Exploration Operating Company, Ltd., Jack L. Gregory, Atlantic Richfield Company, Inc., and TransWorld Resources Corporation. No. 1: 92 CV 496. United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Beaumont Division. March 19, 1993. *1339

ROSZKOWSKI, Senior District Judge. This is an appeal from a judgment notwithstanding the verdict entered by the District Court of Colorado. The suit arose out of a contract between the parties to develop and market a computer software security system invented by the plaintiffs. Following a jury trial in which the plaintiffs essentially prevailed, the District Court struck much of the

44 F.3d 1497 31 Fed.R.Serv.3d 1092 Henry KLEIN, (Realigned as Plaintiff); Gur Shomron, AmiramGrynberg, Defendisk Limited, an Israelicorporation, Plaintiffs/Appellantsv.Jack J. GRYNBERG, (Realigned as Defendant); Defendisk,Inc., a Colorado corporation (Realigned asDefendant); Grynberg Petroleum Company,a Colorado corporation,Defendants/Appellees. Nos. 92-1232,

Opinion by Judge FOX. {1 Plaintiffs, Laura W. "Wendy" Chase and Michael Sutak (collectively Landowners), appeal the district court judgment affirming orders of defendant the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC): (1) declining to interpret the lease between defendants Magpie Operating, Inc. (Magpie) and the Colorado State Board of Land Commissioners (the Board); (2) denying Landowners' request to

HARGRAVE, Vice Chief Justice. The question certified to this Court arises in an action that is a result of a dispute over the costs of drilling and operating the Harmon No. 1-31 well, located in Section 31, T24N, R16W in Woods County, Oklahoma. The defendant, Jack Grynberg & Associates, and the plaintiff, Hadson Petroleum Corporation, entered into a private contractual agreement providing for the allocat

274 P.3d 832 (2011) 2012 OK CIV APP 31 John Ed MORGAN and Elaine Morgan, Respondents/Appellants, v. OKLAHOMA CORPORATION COMMISSION and Chevron USA, Inc., Applicants/Appellees. No. 108,711. Released for Publication by Order of the Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, Division No. 4. Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, Division No. 4. November 9, 2011.

JAMES O. BROWNING, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE *931THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) Defendant Airswift Holdings Limited's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Brief in Support, filed November 8, 2017 (Doc. 7)("Motion"); (ii) the Plaintiffs' Motion to Stay Ruling Pending Jurisdictional Discovery o

Senior Judge Wiley Y. Daniel *1171FINDINGS OF FACT I. STIPULATED JOINT FACTS 1 A. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 1. On February 27, 2015, Plaintiffs Branta, LLC ("Branta"), Branta Exploration & Production Company, LL

GORSUCH, Circuit Judge. Harnessing nuclear energy is a delicate business. So is the statute before us. Originally passed in the 1950s in an era captivated by the promise of nuclear power and amended in the 1980s in the aftermath of the Three' Mile Island meltdown when prevailing public sentiment was perhaps less sanguine, the Price-Anderson Act seeks both to promote the private nuclear energy industry and, simultaneously,

OPINION TRACY CHRISTOPHER, Justice. This is an appeal of the trial court’s rulings on cross-motions for summary judgment by the successors of the parties to an asset and stock purchase agreement. The parties to this suit asked the trial court to render declaratory judgment interpreting the contract. The seller’s successor contends that the trial court er

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JUDITH C. HERRERA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter is before the Court on the following motions: Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment — Adverse Possession [Doc. 183]; and Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment— Mineral Ownership and Lease Termination [Doc. 180]. In this Memorandum Opinion and

533 F.3d 845 (2008) DOMINION TRANSMISSION, INC., Petitioner v. FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, Respondent. PSEG Energy Resources & Trade LLC et al., Intervenors. No. 07-1065. United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit. Argued February 15, 2008. Decided July 25, 2008. Catherine E. Stetson argued the cause for the petit