UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
For the Fifth Circuit
No. 97-10036
Summary Calendar
HOGAN SYSTEMS, INC.,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
VERSUS
CYBRESOURCE INTERNATIONAL, INC.; DAVID BOEHR;
DOUGLAS PERADOWSKI; JAMES HELMS; MICHAEL GREENE,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Northern District of Texas
(3:96-CV-2083-H)
October 20, 1997
Before DUHÉ, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Hogan Systems, Inc. ("Hogan") filed suit in July 1996 against
Cybresource International, Inc. ("Cybresource") and its employees,
James Helms, Douglas Peradowski and David Boehr, seeking injunctive
and monetary relief from these defendants for copyright
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under
the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
infringement, breach of contract, trade secret misappropriation,
unfair competition, tortious interference and misappropriation. In
August 1996, Hogan filed its application for a preliminary
injunction and on December 10, 1996, the district court conducted
an evidentiary hearing on the requested injunctive relief. At the
conclusion of the hearing, the district court dictated its findings
and conclusions into the record and denied Hogan’s request for
temporary injunctive relief. Hogan timely appealed such denial to
this Court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1).
During the pendency of this appeal, the parties continued to
prosecute the case before the district court and in early June 1997
the district court granted the motion for summary judgment filed by
Cybresource and its employees. Hogan timely appealed from such
final judgment and that appeal is separately docketed in this Court
under Cause No. 97-10645, "Hogan Systems, Inc. v. Cybresource
International, et al." On June 30, 1997, Cybresource, et al. filed
their motion to dismiss this appeal (97-10036) for mootness because
of the entry of such summary judgment.
We have carefully considered Cybresource’s motion to dismiss
for mootness and the response of Hogan thereto and conclude that
this appeal has not been rendered moot because the summary judgment
in favor of Cybresource has itself been appealed and there has been
no final determination of the validity or not of such summary
judgment. Accordingly, we deny the motion to dismiss this appeal
for mootness.
2
We have carefully reviewed the briefs and record excerpts and
relevant portions of the record itself; and conclude, for the
reasons dictated by the district court into the record on December
12, 1996, that the district court did not err in denying Hogan’s
motion for temporary injunction. Accordingly, the Order filed on
December 12, 1996, by the district court is affirmed.
We have not addressed and nothing herein should be construed
as addressing, the issues raised in the separate appeal No. 97-
10645, "Hogan Systems, Inc. v. Cybresource International, Inc., et
al.," now pending before this Court.
3