Ultra-Precision Manufacturing Limited v. Ford Motor Company

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that there was “no final resolution of any one claim, as required by Rule 54(b)”
• noting that a district court's order under - 21 - Rule 54(b) must in and of itself be a final, appealable decision
• explaining that Rule 54(b) only applies when claims are left “unadjudicated”
• declining to find jurisdiction based on its conclusion that there was “no final resolution of any one claim, as required by Rule 54(b)”
• recognizing the “long-standing policy against piecemeal litigation”
• “We apply our own law and not the law of the regional cir- cuit to issues concerning our jurisdiction.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).