Furniture Brands International, Inc. v. United States ( 2012 )


Menu:
  • NOTE: This order is n0nprecedential.
    United States Court of AppeaIs
    for the FederaI Circuit
    FURNITURE BRANDS INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
    PZaintiff-Appellant, '
    V.
    UNITED STATES
    Defendant-Appellee,
    AND
    UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE
    COMMISSION, `
    Defendant-Appellee,
    AND
    AMERICAN FURNITURE MANUFACTURERS
    COMMITTEE FOR LEGAL TRADE AND VAUGHAN-
    BASSETT FURNITURE COMPANY, INC.,
    Defendants-Appellees.
    2012-1059
    Appea1 from the United States C0urt of Internati0na1
    Trade in case n0. 07-CV-OO26, Judge Tim0thy C. Stanceu.
    FURNITURE BRANDS INTL V. US 2
    ASHLEY FURNITURE INDUSTRIES, INC.,
    Plaintiff-Appellan,t,
    V.
    UNITED STATES,
    Defendant-Appellee,
    AND
    UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE
    COMMISSION,
    Defendan,t-Appellee, 1
    AND
    AMERICAN FURNITURE MANUFACTURERS
    COMMITTEE FOR LEGAL TRADE, KINCAID_
    FURNITURE CO., INC., L. & J.G. STICKLEY, INC.,
    SANDBERG FURNITURE MANUFACTURING
    COMPANY, INC., STANLEY FURNITURE
    COMPANY, INC., T. COPELAND AND SONS, INC.,
    AND VAUGI'IAN-BASSETT FURNITURE COMPANY,
    INC.,
    Defen.dants-Appellees.
    2012-1196
    Appea1 from the United Sta1;es Court of International
    Trade in consolidated case no. 07-CV-0323, Judge Timo-
    thy C. Stanceu.
    ETHAN ALLEN GLOBAL, INC. AND ETHAN ALLEN
    OPERATIONS, INC.,
    Plaimiiffs-Appellants,
    V.
    3 FURN`ITURE BRANDS INTL V. US
    UNITED STATES AND UNITED STATES CUSTOMS
    AND BORDER PROTECTION,
    Defendants-Appellees,
    AND
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION,
    Defendo;nt~Appellee,
    AND
    KINCAID FURNITURE CO., INC., L. & J.G.
    STICKLEY, INC., SANDBERG FURNITURE
    MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC., STANLEY
    FURNITURE COMPANY, INC., T. COPELAND AND
    SONS, INC., AND VAUGHAN-BASSETT FURN`ITURE
    COMPANY, INC.
    Defendants-Appellees.
    2012-1200 `
    Appea1 from the U11ited StateS C0u1't of Internati0na1
    Trade in case no. 08-CV-0302, Judge Tim0thy C. Stanceu.
    STANDARD FURNITURE
    MANUFACTURING CO., INC..,
    Plaintiff-Appellan,t,
    V.
    UNITED STATES,
    Defendcmt-Appellee,
    AND
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION,
    Defendant-Appellee,
    AND
    FURNITURE BRANDS INTL V. US 4
    AMERICAN FURNITURE MANUFACTURERS
    COMMITTEE FOR LEGAL TRADE, KINCAID
    FURNITURE CO., INC., L. & J.G. STICKLEY, INC.,
    SANDBERG FURNITURE MANUFACTURING
    COMPANY, INC., STANLEY FURNITURE
    COMPANY, INC., T. COPELAND AND SONS, INC.,
    AND VAUGHAN-BASSETT FURNITURE COMPANY,
    INC.,
    Defen.dants-Appellees.
    2012-1230
    Appeal from the United States Court of International
    Trade in case no. 07-CV-0028, Judge Timothy C. Stanceu.
    ON MOTION
    Before BRYSON, MAYER, LINN, Circuit Judges.
    BRYSON, C'ircu,it Ju,dge.
    0 R I) E R
    Furniture Brands lnternati0nal, Inc., Ashley Furni-
    ture lndustries, Inc., Ethan Allen Global, Inc. et al., and
    Standard Furniture l\/Ianufacturing Co., Inc. each sepa-
    rately move for an injunction, pending appeal, to prohibit
    the United States from distributing funds currently being
    held for each appellant.
    In deciding whether to grant a stay or injunction,
    pending appeal, this court "assesses the movant’s chances
    of success on the merits and weighs the equities as they
    affect the parties and the public.” E.I. Dupont de Ne-
    5 FURN`lTURE BRANDS INTL V. US
    mou,rs & Co. v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 
    835 F.2d 277
    , 278
    (Fed. Cir. 1987); see also Standard Hcwens Prods. u.
    Gencor Indus., 
    897 F.2d 511
     (Fed. Cir. 1990). To prevail,
    a movant must establish a strong likelihood of success on
    the merits or, failing that, must demonstrate that it has a
    substantial case on the merits and that the harm factors
    militate in its favor. Hilton v. Brounskill, 
    481 U.S. 770
    ,
    778 (1987).
    Without prejudicing the ultimate disposition of these
    cases, and based upon the motions papers submitted, the
    court determines that the appellants have not met their
    burden.
    According1y,
    IT Is 0RDERED THAT:
    The motions for an injunction are denied.
    FoR THE CoURT
    MAR 0 5 2012 /si Jan Horbaly
    Date J an Horbaly
    Clerk
    cc: Joseph W. Dorn, Esq.
    Jeffrey S. Grimson, Esq.
    Patrick V. Gallagher, Esq.
    Jessica R. T0p]in, Esq. F"_ED
    ' ' U.S.COURTO
    §j;i1;11‘;V-L1:jv§;“§;hESq- rHEFEnEA“AlP¢5E‘§tS»r’°“
    Jeffrey M. Telep, Esq. l’lAR 05 2012
    319 sANH0naALv
    dean