Digest of M-I, LLC v. FPUSA, LLC, No. 2015-1870 (Fed. Cir. Sep. 24, 2015) (non-precedential). On appeal from W.D. Tex. Before Prost, Bryson, and Hughes.
Procedural Posture: Defendants/accused infringers appealed preliminary injunction order. CAFC affirmed in part, vacated and remanded in part.
- Injunctions: The district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction. The court did not err in finding the plaintiff was likely to prove infringement of a valid claim and irreparable harm would likely result because the plaintiff and defendant were the only players in the relevant market, giving rise to an inference that an infringing sale would amount to a lost sale for the plaintiff. The court also correctly found the balance of equities is neutral and public interest weighs in favor of an injunction. However, the form of the preliminary injunction required correction on remand. As ordered, the injunction extended to products other than those that clearly infringe the patent and was thus overbroad. In addition, the injunction order did not include a description of the enjoined acts, as is required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(d), which is strictly construed in the Fifth Circuit.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.