-28

tailers had not sold VTRS used for any home recording in issue (Pet. App. 94).

The district court recognized that it was "reviewing the limited claims of specified parties in a particular factual setting" and that it was "bound by the factual context of this litigation" (Pet. App. 34, 55-6, 81-82, 115). The district court made its findings of fact based on the evidence before it, and resolved the case or controversy about "time shift" presented to it.

In contrast. the Court of Appeals ignored the factual issues which made up the lawsuit, ignored the evidence and ignored the findings. Substituting contrary assumptions and contrary treatise references for the evidence and the findings, the Court of Appeals issued sweeping and generalized broadsides holding all off-the-air home video recording (no matter the program, no matter the purpose) to be copyright infringement and holding everyone before it, alleged to be liable or not, to be a contributory infringer for all such recording. Only this Court can correct such gross deviation from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings - deviation that amounts to a denial of due process of law.

Conclusion.

For each and all of the foregoing reasons. a writ of certiorari should issue to review the judgment and opinion of the Ninth Circuit.

Respectfully submitted,

DEAN C. DUNLAVEY,

(Counsel of Record),

DONALD E. SLOAN.

Attorneys for Petitioners,

MARSHALL RUTTER

Of Counsel:

March 11, 1982

Sony Corporation of America, et al.