Accent Films, B v. V. Universal City Studios, Inc., and McA Incorporated, Accent Films, B v. Ghaith International S.A. Saudi Research & Development Corporation, Ltd. v. Universal City Studios, Inc. McA Incorporated

24 F.3d 244 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. ACCENT FILMS, B.V., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC., Defendant-Appellant, and MCA Incorporated, Defendant. ACCENT FILMS, B.V.; Ghaith International S.A.; Saudi Research & Development Corporation, Ltd., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC.; MCA Incorporated, Defendants-Appellees. Nos. 92-55286, 92-55343. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 4, 1993. Decided April 28, 1994. Before: NORRIS, WIGGINS, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * Universal's Appeal 2 Universal's appeal focuses on the district court's refusal to instruct the jury on Universal's theory of mitigation, as outlined in Universal's proposed jury instruction 44-B and supplemental jury instructions # 3, # 4, and # 5. I. Barment 3 Accent claims that Universal's proposed Instruction 44-B and Supplemental Instructions # 3, # 4, and # 5 were barred for two reasons: (1)…