Fujiam Hongan Electric Co., Ltd. v. International Trade Commission ( 2012 )


Menu:
  • Case: 12-1493   Document: 35      Page: 1   Filed: 09/20/2012
    NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
    muiteb ~tate5 Qtourt of ~peaI5
    for tbe jfeberaI Qtircuit
    FUJIAN HONGAN ELECTRIC CO., LTD. AND
    ZHEJIANG TRIMONE ELECTRIC SCIENCE &
    TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD.,
    Appellants,
    v.
    INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION,
    Appellee,
    AND
    LEVITON MANUFACTURING CO., INC.,
    Intervenor.
    2012-1493
    On appeal from the United States International Trade
    Commission in Investigation No. 337-TA-739.
    ON MOTION
    Before BRYSON, MOORE, and O'MALLEY, Circuit Judges.
    O'MALLEY, Circuit Judge.
    ORDER
    Case: 12-1493      Document: 35      Page: 2     Filed: 09/20/2012
    FUJIAN HONGAN ELECTRIC CO. V. ITC                                 2
    Fujian Hongan Electric Co., Ltd. and Zhejiang Tri-
    mone Electric Science & Technology Co., Ltd. (collectively,
    Fujian) move for a stay, pending disposition of this ap-
    peal, of the remedial orders entered by the United States
    International Trade Commission.        The International
    Trade Commission and Leviton Manufacturing oppose.
    Fujian replies.
    To obtain a stay, pending appeal, a movant must estab-
    lish 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.
    Hilton v. Braunskill, 
    481 U.S. 770
    , 778 (1987). In deciding
    whether to grant a stay, pending appeal, this court "as-
    sesses the movant's chances of success on the merits and
    weighs the equities as they affect the parties and the
    public." E. 1. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. Phillips Petro-
    leum Co., 
    835 F.2d 277
    , 278 (Fed. Cir. 1987). See also
    Standard Havens Prods. v. Gencor Indus., 
    897 F.2d 511
    (Fed. Cir. 1990).
    Based on the arguments in the motions papers, and
    without prejudicing the ultimate disposition of this case
    by a merits panel, we determine that Fujian has not met
    its burden to obtain a stay of the injunction.
    Accordingly,
    IT Is ORDERED THAT:
    The motion is denied.
    FOR THE COURT
    SEP 20 2012                       /s/ Jan Horbaly
    Date                          Jan Horbaly
    Clerk
    U.8. eouJlt~~PEALS FOR
    M FEDERtl,l C!RCUIT
    SEP 20 Z012
    JANHOR8ALY
    CLERK
    Case: 12-1493     Document: 35     Page: 3   Filed: 09/20/2012
    3                         FUJIAN HONGAN ELECTRIC CO. V. ITC
    cc: Lei Mei, Esq.
    Clark S. Cheney, Esq.
    Larry L. Shatzer, III, Esq.
    s24