Case ID: f-appx_388/html/0989-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

PRESIDIO COMPONENTS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. AMERICAN TECHNICAL CERAMICS CORP., Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 2010-1355.
    United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
    July 28, 2010.
    Brett A. Schatz, Wood, Herron & Evans, L.L.P., Cincinnati, OH, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee.
    Marvin S. Gittes, Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky, New York, NY, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before RADER, Chief Judge.
   ON MOTION

ORDER

American Technical Ceramics Corp. moves without opposition for an extension of time to file its brief and to stay the briefing schedule in this appeal pending proceedings before the United States District Court for the Southern District of California and “entry of a comprehensive final judgment.” The court considers whether American Technical should be directed to respond why this appeal should not be dismissed as premature.

American Technical’s notice of appeal indicates that American Technical seeks review of the district court’s April 13, 2010, 2010 WL 1462757, order denying in part its motions for judgment as a matter of law and/or for a new trial. American Technical states that this order is considered an entry of judgment under Fed. R.Civ.P. 58, “thus starting the clock for an appeal running.”

This court has jurisdiction over final decisions of district courts in eases that otherwise fall within our jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(1). “A ‘final decision’ generally is one which ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment.” Catlin v. United States, 324 U.S. 229, 233, 65 S.Ct. 631, 89 L.Ed. 911 (1945). In this case, it appears that the district court has not issued a final decision.

Accordingly,

IT Is ORDERED THAT:

(1) American Technical is directed to respond within 14 days of the date of filing of this order why this appeal should not be dismissed as premature. Presidio Components, Inc. may also respond within that time.

(2) The briefing schedule is stayed.

(3) American Technical’s motions are held in abeyance.