General Protecht Group, Inc. v. Leviton Manufacturing Co., Inc.

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential United States Court of AppeaIs for the FederaI Circuit GENERAL PROTECHT GROUP, INC., (FORMERLY KNOWN As ZHE.JIANG DONGzHENG ELEcTR1cAL C0.), G-TECHT GLOBAL CORPORATION, SECURELECTRIC CORPORATION, AND WAREHOUSE-LIGHTING.COM,LLC, \ Plaintiffs-Appellees, and CENTRAL PURCHASING, LLC AND HARBOR FREIGHT TOOLS USA, INC., Plain,tiffs-Appellees, 1 ‘ V. LEVITON M.ANUFACTURING CO., INC., Defendant-Appellant. 2011-1115 Appeal from the United States District C0urt for the District of New Mexic0 in case n0. 10-CV-1020, Judge James O. Br0Wni11g. GENERAL PROTECHT V. LEV`[TON MFG 2 ON MOTION Before RADER, Chief Judge, FR1EDMAN and LlNN, Circuit Judges. FR1EDMAN, Circu,it Ju,dge. 0 R D E R Levit0n Manufacturing Co., Inc. moves for a stay, pending appeal, of the preliminary injunction entered by the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico. General Protecht Group, Inc. et al. and Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc. et al. (collectively "General Pro- techt") oppose. Leviton replies. In 2007, Leviton entered into a Confidential Sett1e- ment Agreement with various parties, including some of the plaintiffs in the present lawsuit. That agreement settled a previous infringement action brought in the United States District Court for the District of NeW Mexico. ln September of 2010, Leviton filed complaints with the ITC and with the United Statxes District Court for the Northern District of California, asserting in- fringement of two patents not asserted in the previous NeW MeXico lawsuit In response, General Protecht filed the underlying complaint in the New Mexico district court, seeking declaratory judgments of noninfringement, invalidity, and unenforceability of the two patents. General Protecht also sought damages for breach of the settlement agree- ment and an injunction to require that Leviton dismiss the recent complaints filed against the plaintiffs because they are related to the settlement agreen;1ent. General Protecht asserted, inter alia, a defense that the plaintiffs were granted an implied license by the settlement agree- 3 GENERAL PROTECHT V. LEVITON MFG ment and that the settlement agreement required that all disputes arising under the settlement agreement be litigated in the New Mexico district court, ln the New Mexico district court, General Protecht moved for a preliminary injunction to require that Leviton dismiss its complaints asserting patent infringement against the plaintiffs. The district court reviewed the settlement agreement and granted the motion. The district court denied LeViton's motion to stay the injunc- tion while Leviton pursued an appeal with this court. Levit0n appealed the injunction and moves this court for a stay of the injunction, pending disposition of the appeal by this court. We recently expedited the briefing of this appeal and placed this appeal on the April 2011 argument calendar To obtain a stay, pending appeal, a movant must es- tablish a strong likelihood of success on the merits or, failing that, nonetheless demonstrate a substantial case on the merits provided that the harm factors ‘militate in its favor. Stcmdard Hauen.s Prods. v. Gencor Indus., 897 F.2d 511, 513 (Fed. Cir. 199U) (citing Hilton, u. Braunskill, 481 U.S. 770, 778 (19S7)). ln deciding whether to grant a stay, pending appeal, this court “assesses the movants chances of success on the merits and weighs the equities as they affect the parties and the public.” E.I. DuPont de Nemours & C'o. v. Phillips Petroleu.m Co., 835 F.2d 277, 278 (Fed. Cir. 1987); see also Stanclarol Havens Prods., 897 F.2d at 513. Based on the arguments in the motions papers, and without prejudicing the ultimate disposition of this case by a merits panel, we determine that Leviton has not met its burden to obtain a stay of the injunction. Accordingly, IT lS ORDERED Tl~lATZ GENERAL PROTECHT V. LEVITON MFG The motion is denied. 4 FoR THE CoURT JAN l 8 2911 151 Jan H0rba1y Date J an Horbaly ccc l\/lark J. Rosenberg, Esq. William F. Long, Esq. Larry L. Shatzer, Esq. s8 Clerk FlLED us count rHEFED?§».t"5it‘€F°“ JAN 1 3`Z0l1 JANHDRBA|.¥ C|.EH¢ ¢