# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 2- 29 82

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Nov us Fran ch is in g, In c.

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

v.

Mi ch ael L. Dawso n; CarM ik e, In c.

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an ts - App el le es

__ __ __ __ __ __

App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t
fo r th e Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta - Mi nn eap ol is

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Ju ne 13 , 20 13
Fil ed : Au gu st 5, 2 01 3

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re LOKEN, BRIGHT, and BYE, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __

BYE, Cir cu it Ju dg e.

Thi s is a di sp ut e ov er an au to m ot iv e gl as s rep ai r fran ch is e l o c a te d in

Ri ch m on d, Virg in ia

. Nov us Fran ch is in g, In c. (No vu s) ap p e a l s th e di st ric t co ur t's 1

The Hon or ab le Jo hn R. Tun he im

, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct 1

of Mi nn es ot a.refu sa l to en fo rce a no n- co m pe te cl au se ag ai ns t fran ch is ee Mi ch ael L. Dawso n as pa rt

of a p rel im in ary in

jun ct io n wh ic h p ro hi bi ts Dawso n fro m us in g Nov us 's m ark s an d

p r o du ct s in hi s au to m ot iv e gl as s rep ai r bu si ne ss

. The di st ric t co ur t di s mi s s e d

Dawso n's co rp or at io n, CarM ik e, In c., fro m th e su it aft er co nc lu di ng Nov us fai le d to

al le ge su ffi ci en t fact s fo r a Mi nn es ot a co ur t to ex erci se pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on ov er th e Virg in ia co rp or at io n; th e di st ric t co ur t al so ga ve Dawso n a n e x t en si on of ti m e in

whi ch to fil e an an swe r. In ad di ti on to ch al le ng in g th e sc op e of th e in jun ct iv e rel ie f

gr an te d by th e di st ric t co ur t, Nov us ap pe al s th es e two ot he r as pe ct s of t he di st ric t

co ur t's or de r. W e d i s m is s th es e two ad di ti on al is su es fo r la ck of ap pe ll at e juri sd ic ti on , and affi rm

th e d is tri ct co ur t's pre li m in ary in jun ct io n.

I

Nov us op erat es au to m ot iv e gl as s rep ai r fran ch is es wor ld wid e wit h a pr in ci pa l
pl ace of bu si ne ss in Mi nn es ot a. Dawso n be ga n a twen ty-y ear rel at io ns hi p wit h

Nov us as o ne of i ts fran ch is ees in 19 90 , wh en he an d hi s fat he r pu rch as ed a Nov us

fran ch is e in Ch arl ot te sv il le , Vi rg in ia

. Fi ve y ears la te r, Daw s o n p u r c ha se d hi s own

Nov us fran ch is e co ve rin g t he Virg in ia co un ti es of Han ov er an d Hen ric o, in cl ud in g

th e m et ro po li ta n area of Ri ch m on d, Virg in ia

. Dawso n an d Nov us la te r en te red in to

a te n- y ear fran ch is e ag reem en t co ve rin g th e sa m e Area of P rimary Res po ns ib il it y (APR) in 19 98

. Ano th er te n y ears la te r in 20 08

, Dawso n an d Nov us ag reed to ren ew

th ei r fran ch is e rel at io ns hi p. Th e 20 08 fran ch is e ag reem en t th e pa rti es si gn ed is th e

su bjec t o f th is laws ui t.

The 20 08 fran ch is e ag reem en t co nt ai ne d t he fol lo win g n on -co m pe te cla us e:

You ag ree th at y ou , y ou r Owner s, th e Pers on al Gua ran to rs , an d th e

m em be rs of y ou r an d th ei r im m ed ia te fam il ie s wil l no t, fo r a p eri od of

two y ears aft er th e te rm in at io n or ex pi rat io n of th is Agr eem en t, fo r y ou r

or th ei r own acco un t or as an em pl o ye e , a g e nt

, co ns ul ta nt

, pa rtn er, of fic er, di rect or , m em

be r , o r own er of an y ot he r pe rs on , fir m , en ti ty,

-2

-pa rtn ers hi p, co m pa ny or co rp or at io n (a) se ek to em pl oy an y pe rs on who
is at th at ti m e em

pl oye d b y us or by an y Nov us fran ch is ee wit ho ut th e

pr io r co ns en t of th ei r em pl oyer, (b ) own , op erat e , le as e, fran ch is e, li cen se , c on du ct , e ng ag e in , con su lt wit h, b e co nn ect ed wit h, h av e an y in te res t in

, or as si st an y pe rs on or en ti ty en ga ge d i n any ot he r bu si ne ss th at is in an y way co m

pe ti ti ve wit h or si m il ar to th e Bu si ne ss Sy st em or th e Bu si ne ss (in cl ud in g an y gl as s rep ai r an d/ or gl as s r e p l acement or in st al la ti on bu si ne ss ) if th at bu si ne ss is lo cat ed wit hi n (i) y ou r APR, (ii )

or an y area of pr im ary res po ns ib il it y we g r a n t to an y ot he r Nov us fran ch is e o r bu si ne ss , or (i ii ) wit hi n te n m il es of an y bu si ne ss lo cat io n of an y Nov us fran ch i s e o r bu si ne ss in th e Uni te d St at es an d it s

po ss es si on s.

App en di x a t 7 1.

Dawso n al so ag reed "t ha t th e ti m e an d ge og rap hi cal li m it at io ns se t fo rth in [th e

no n- co m pe te ] pr ov is io n are reas on ab le an d ne ces sa r y to pr ot ect [No vu s] an d ou r

fran ch is es if t hi s Ag reem en t ex pi res or i s t erm in at ed by eith er p art y for an y reas on ,

an d th at th is co ve na nt no t to co m pe te is ne ces sa ry to pe rm it [No vu s] th e op po rtu ni ty

to res el l an d/ or d e v e l o p a ne w Nov us bu si ne ss wit hi n [Daws on 's] APR." Id

. In

ad di ti on , Dawso n agr eed he wou ld ha ve no rig ht to us e th e n am es an d m ark s o f th e

N ovus busi ne ss syste m up on th e te rm in at io n or ex pi rat io n of th e fran ch is e ag re em en t.

Fi n a l l y, Dawso n ag reed al l le ga l act io ns be twee n th e pa rti es wou ld be ve nu ed in

Hen ne pi n C ou nt y , Min ne so ta

.

Dawso n st op pe d pa y in g th e ro y al ti es du e un de r th e 20 08 fran ch is e ag reem en t

i n Octo be r 20 10

. He al le ge s he was un ab le to pa y th e ro y al ty fees b e c a u s e N o v u s

gr an te d a fran ch is e in hi s te rri to ry to an ot he r pe rs on , Barr y Ro bi ns o n, an d th e

"re su lt in g in te r-fra nc hi se co m pe ti ti on be twee n Dawso n an d Ro bi ns on i n wha t

Dawso n ha d be en le d to be li ev e was hi s te rri to ry vi rtu al ly de st ro y ed Dawso n's

bu si ne ss , ren de rin g it im p o s s i b l e f

o r hi m to pa y th e m in im um fran ch is e fees ."

Ans wer at ¶ 36

. On Fe br ua ry 11 , 2 01 1, fo ur m on th s aft er Dawso n st op pe d pa y in g

-3

-ro y al ti es , Nov us se nt hi m a Not ic e of Defau lt le tt er, in fo rm in g hi m th at hi s fai lu re to

su bm it gr os s rev en ue rep or ts an d ro y a l t ie s was a m at eri al br each of th e 20 08

fran ch is e ag reem en t. Nov us to ld Dawso n he ha d to cu re th e de fau lt s or hi s fran ch is e

ag reem en t wou ld be te rm in at ed

. Dawso n di d no t cu re th e de fau lt s. On Octo be r 21

, 20 11 , a fu ll y ear aft er Da w s o n s t op pe d pa y in g ro y al ti es , No vu s no ti fie d hi m it was

te rm in at i n g t h e 20 08 fran ch is e ag reem en t. The Not ic e of Term in at io n rem in de d

D a w s on of hi s po st -te rm in at io n ob li ga ti on s un de r th e no n- co m pe te cl au se of t h e

ag reem en t, as well as Dawso n's lo ss of th e rig ht to us e Nov us 's na m es or m ark s o r

bu si ne ss syste m

.

Des pi te no t pa y in g ro y al ty fees to Nov u s , D a w s on co nt in ue d op erat in g an

au tom otive gl as s rep ai r bu si ne ss whi ch ad ve rti se d it se lf as "No vu s Glas s by CarM ik e,

In c." On Feb ru ary 29

, 20 12

, Nov us fil ed su it ag ai ns t Dawso n an d CarM ik e in fed eral

di st ric t co ur t in th e Dis tri ct of Mi nn es ot a. The su it as se rte d cl ai m s fo r br each of th e

fran ch is e ag reem en t, co nv ers io n of Nov us 's eq ui pm en t, tra de m ark in fri ng em en t,

vi ol at io n of th e Mi nn es ot a Decep ti ve Trad e Prac ti ces Act, un jus t en ric hm en t, un fai r

co m pe ti ti on , an d a d e man d fo r an acco un ti ng

. W it h res pe ct to CarM ik e, Nov us

al le ge d Dawso n was "a co rp or at e of fic er of CarM ik e" an d th at Dawso n "en te red in to

the Fr an ch ise A gr ee m en t wit h a Mi nn es ot a-b as ed co rp or at io n, carr ie d on an ex te nsi ve

bu si ne ss rel at io ns hi p wit h a Mi nn es ot a co rp or at io n, an d hi s br each es of co nt ract ha ve gi ve n ris e to in

juri es in th e St at e of Mi nn es ot a." Co m pl ai nt at ¶ 12

. Dawso n di d no t

res po nd to th e su it by fili ng an an swe r or m ov in g t o d is m is s t he co m pl ai nt

.

On Mar ch 26

, 20 12
– ov er se ve nt een m on th s aft er Dawso n st op pe d m ak in g

ro y al ty pa y m en ts

– Nov us fil ed a m ot io n fo r a pr el im in ary in jun ct io n se ek in g

en fo rcem en t of the no n- co m pe te pr ov is io ns of th e fran ch is e ag reem en t and se ek in g

to pr oh ib it Dawso n fro m us in g Nov us 's m ark s an d pr od uc ts in hi s on go in g

au to m ot iv e gl as s rep ai r bu si ne ss

. Nov us al so req ue st ed a de fau lt jud gm en t be cau se

Dawso n ha d no t res po nd ed to th e co m pl ai nt

. The di st ric t co ur t se t a he ari ng fo r th e

two m ot io ns on May 8, 20 12

. Fo ur da y s be fo re th e he a r i n g , h o w e ve r, Dawso n

-4

-em ai le d th e di st ric t co ur t as ki ng f o r an ex te ns io n of th e he ari ng da te

. The di st ric t

co ur t gr an te d th e req ue st an d res et t h e h e a r in g fo r Ju ly 9 , 2 01 2. By th e ti m e of th e

Ju ly 9 he ari ng da te

, Dawso n st il l h a d n o t f il ed an an swe r or m ov ed to di sm is s th e

co m pl ai nt

.

Dawso n ap pe ared at th e Ju ly 9 he ari ng by ph on e, rep res en ti ng hi m se lf pr o se

. He ex pl ai ne d he co ul d no t affo rd to hi re an atto rn ey be cau se he was "b arel y pu tt in g

fo od on th e ta bl e an d ba rel y m ak in g ou r m or tg ag e." He sa id he ha d th ree ch il dr en to

su pp or t an d "co ul d be faci ng ba nk ru pt cy " as a res ul t of th e di sp ut e wit h Nov us

. The

di st r i c t co ur t qu es ti on ed whe th er Dawso n's co rp or at io n, CarM ik e, was su bjec t to juri sd ic ti on in Mi nn es ot a. The di st ric t co ur t al so as ke d Dawso n whe th er he in te nd ed

to fil e an an swe r to th e co m pl ai nt

, a nd Dawso n sa id he "wo ul d li ke to try to fin d a

la wy er."

On Ju ly 15

, 20 12

, th e di st ric t co ur t en te red an or de r gr an ti ng Nov us 's m ot io ns

in pa rt an d de nyin g th em in pa rt. The di st ric t co ur t di sm is se d CarM ik e fro m th e su it

fo r la ck of pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on aft er co nc lu di ng Nov us di d no t al le ge th e co rp or at io n

ha d a n y rel at io ns hi p to Dawso n's fran ch is e wit h Nov us

. The di st ric t co ur t st at ed

"No vu s ha s no t al le ge d an y in de pe nd en t co nt a c t s t h a t CarM ik e, In c. ha s ha d wit h

Mi nn es ot a, rel y i n g i ns te ad on Dawso n's act io ns to es ta bl is h juri sd ic ti on ov er

CarM ik e, In c. Howev er, Nov us ha s no t sh own th at Dawso n was act in g as CarM ik e,

In c.'s ag en t whe n he en te red in to a fran ch is e ag reem en t wit h Nov us ." Add en du m at

3.

The di st ric t c o u r t gr an te d Nov us 's req ue st fo r a pr el im in ary in jun ct io n to

pr oh ib it Dawso n fro m us in g Nov us 's m ark s an d pr od uc ts

. The di st ric t co ur t di d no t,

ho wev er, gr an t Nov us 's req ue st to en fo rce th e 20 08 fran ch i s e a g reem en t's no nco m pe te cl au se as pa rt of th e pr el im in ary in jun ct io n. Th e d is tri ct co ur t de te rm in ed

"No vu s ha s no t sh o wn th at it wil l su ffer irr ep arab le ha rm if Dawso n co nt in ue s to

op erat e hi s bu si ne ss wit ho ut us in g Nov us pr od uc ts or se rv ic es , no r ha s Nov us sh own

-5

-th at th e ba la nc e of th e ha rm s or th e pu bl ic in te res t weig hs ag ai ns t al lo win g Dawso n

to co nt in ue to op erat e h is bu si ne ss wit ho ut Nov us m ark s o r pr od uc ts ." Id . at 5

.

The di st ric t co ur t al so ga ve Dawso n si xt y da y s t o f i l e an an swe r to th e

co mp la in t. Dawso n la te r ret ai ne d an at to rn ey an d fil ed an an swe r. He al so fil ed a

co un te rcl ai m al le gi ng th at Nov us en ga ge d in co m m on la w frau d by in du ci ng hi m to

si gn th e 20 08 fran ch is e ag reem en t wit ho u t d is cl os in g to hi m th at hi s te rri to ry ha d

be en sp li t an d a ne w fran ch is e ha d be en of fere d to Ro bi ns on whi ch in cl ud ed al l of hi s

APR. Dawso n al so al le ge d Nov us vi ol at ed th e Mi nn es ot a Fran ch is e Act du rin g th e

ne go ti at io ns for

th e 2 00 8 fr an ch is e ag reem en t.

Nov us ti m el y fil ed an in te rlo cu to ry ap pe al of th e di st ric t co ur t's or de r. See 28

U.S.C. § 12 92 (a)( 1) (g ran ti ng th e co ur ts o f a p p eal s juri sd ic ti on ov er in te rlo cu to ry

or de rs of th e di st ric t co ur ts "g ran ti ng , co nt in ui ng , m od ifyin g, refu si ng or di ss ol vi ng

in jun ct io ns , or refu si ng to di ss ol ve or m od ify in jun ct io ns "). On ap pe a l

, N o vu s

co nt en ds th e di st ric t co ur t erre d in refu si ng to en fo rce th e no n- co m pe te pr ov is io ns as

pa rt of th e pr el im in ary in jun ct io n is su ed a g a in st Dawso n, erre d in di sm is si ng

CarM ik e fo r la ck of pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on , an d erre d in gr an ti ng Dawso n an ad di ti on al

si xt y da y s i n wh ic h t o fi le an an swe r.

II

Befo re consi de ri ng the pr op rie ty of th e di st ric t co ur t's in jun ct iv e rel ie f, we ne ed

to ad dr es s whe th er we ha ve ju r i s d i c t i o n ov er Nov us 's ap pe al of th e di sm is sa l of

CarM ik e fo r la ck of pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on an d th e or de r gr an ti ng Dawso n an ex te ns io n

of ti m e to fil e an an swe r. See W at ers on v. Hall

, 51 5 F.3 d 85 2, 85 5 n.3 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 )
(n ot in g ou r ob li g a t io n to rai se an is su e of ap pe ll at e juri sd ic ti on su a sp on te ev en

th ou gh no t ch al le ng ed by an ap pe ll ee).

-6

-W e fir st ad dr es s th e di st ric t cou rt' s di sm is sa l of CarMi ke fo r la ck of pe rs on al

juri sd ic ti on

. The di st ric t co ur t in cl ud e d t he di sm is sa l of CarM ik e in it s or de r

ad dr es si ng Nov us 's req ue st fo r in jun ct iv e rel ie f, an d th e di sm is sa l ha d t he pra ct ic al

effe ct of de nyin g Nov us a pr el im in ary in jun ct io n ag ai ns t CarM ik e. The di st ric t co ur t

di d no t, ho wev er, en te r a cert ifi cat io n un de r Ru le 54 (b ) of th e Fed eral Ru le s of Ci vi l

Pro ced ur e wit h res pe ct to CarM ik e ' s d i sm is sa l. Abs en t a Ru le 54 (b ) cert ifi cat io n, "[a ]n or de r di sm is si ng on e pa rty fo r la ck of pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on whi le al lo win g su it

to co nt in ue ag ai ns t th e rem ai ni ng de fen da nt s is n ot a fin al

, ap pe al ab le or de r[.]"
Sp eci al In vs ., In c. v. Aero Air, In c., 36 0 F.3 d 98 9, 9 9 3 ( 9 t h C ir. 20 04 ); se e al so

Mo rto n In t'l , I nc . v . A.E. St al ey Mfg . C o., 46 0 F .3d 47 0, 4 76 (3d Cir . 2 00 6) ("[ A] n

or de r

. . . in whi ch th e di st ric t co ur t di sm is se d on e de fen da nt fo r wan t of pe rs o n al
ju r i s d i c t io n bu t ot he r de fen da nt s rem ai ne d, co ul d no t in it se lf be a fin al or de r fo r

pu rp os es of a pp eal when th e co ur t en te red it .").

In it s ju ris di ct io na l st at em en t, Nov us ci te s Qui nn v. Mi ss ou ri, 83 9 F.2 d 42 5,

42 6 (8 th Ci r. 19 88 ), a n d c l a i m s th e en ti re or de r gr an ti ng in jun ct iv e rel ie f (wh ic h

in cl ud ed CarM ik e's d i s mi s sa l an d th e ex te ns io n of ti m e to fil e an an swe r) is

rev ie wab le on ap pe al

. Qui nn m erel y qu ot ed fro m an earl ie r Eig ht h Ci rcu it cas e whi ch

sa id "an ap pe al fro m an or de r gr an ti ng or refu si ng in jun ct iv e rel ie f pu r s u a n t to 28

U.S.C. § 12 92 (a)( 1) pr es en ts fo r ap pe ll at e rev ie w t h e e nt ire or de r, no t m erel y th e

pr op rie ty o f in

jun ct iv e rel ie f." McNa ll y v. Pu li tz er Pu bl 'g C o., 5 32 F.2 d 69 , 7 3– 74
(8 th Ci r. 19 76 ). W e be li ev e th is br oa d st at em en t, m ad e ov er th irt y -fi ve y ears ag o in

McNa ll y , ha s be en na rro wed by a su bs eq ue nt Su pr em e Co ur t de ci si on an d th us do es

no t bi nd us

. See U n i t e d S t a t e s v. W il li am s, 53 7 F.3 d 96 9, 97 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 )
(in di cat in g th e ge ne ral ru le pr oh ib it in g on e pa ne l fro m ov erru li ng an ot he r pa ne l do es

no t ap pl y when an in te rv en in g S up rem e Co ur t d eci si on is ha nd ed do wn)

.

In Cars on v. A mer i c a n Bran ds

, In c., 45 0 U.S. 79 (1 98 1)

, th e Su pr em e Co ur t

reco gn iz ed a di st in ct io n be twee n or de rs th at sp eci f i c al ly de ny in

jun ct iv e rel ie f an d

th os e or de rs th at m erel y ha ve th e pr act ic al effe ct of do in g so

. Id

. at 83 -8 4. Fo r "[a ]n

-7

-or de r th at m erel y ha s th e pr act ic al effe ct of de nyin g an in jun ct io n [to be ] im m ed ia te ly

ap pe al ab le ," Cars on req ui res a li ti ga nt to sh ow "t he or de r m ig ht ha ve so m e 'se rio us ,
pe rh ap s, irrep arab le

, co ns eq ue nc e' and th at th e or de r can be 'effe ct ua ll y ch al le ng ed '

on ly by im m ed ia te ap pe al ." Kau sl er v. Cam pe y , 9 89 F.2 d 29 6, 29 9 (8 th Cir . 19 93 )
(q uo ti ng Cars on , 45 0 U.S. at 84 ). "If th e affe ct ed pa rty can no t es ta bl is h th at bo th of

th e Cars on req uir em en ts ha ve be en sa ti sf ie d, 'th e ge ne ral co ng res si on al po li cy ag ai ns t
pi ecemeal rev ie w wil l pr ecl ud e in te rlo cu to ry ap pe al .'" Id

. (q uo ti ng Cars on , 45 0 U.S.

at 84 ).

The or de r di sm is si ng CarM ik e fo r wan t o f p ers on al juri sd ic ti on is su bjec t to

th e Cars on te st be cau se it di d no t sp eci fic al ly de ny an in jun ct io n ag ai ns t CarM ik e, bu t

ha d th e pr act ic al effe ct of do in g s o

. In de ed

, Cars on it se lf di sc us se d an earl ie r

Su p r e me Co ur t cas e wit h ci rcu m st an ces cl os el y an al og ou s to th os e in vo lv ed he re.

In Gen eral Elec tri c Co

. v. Mar ve l Rare Met al s Co

., 28 7 U.S. 43 0 (1 93 2)

, a de fen da nt

in a pa te nt in fri ng em en t su it br ou gh t a co un te rcl ai m fo r pa te nt in fri ng em en t ag ai ns t

th e pl ai nt iff

s an d so ug ht in

jun ct iv e rel ie f. The di s tri ct co ur t di sm is se d th e

co un te rcl ai m fo r la ck of pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on , whi ch ha d th e pr act ic al effe c t o f

de nyin g t he de fen da nt 's re qu es t for in jun ct iv e rel ie f. W he n t he de fen da nt ap pe al ed

to th e Si xt h Ci rcu it

, th e pl ai nt iff s cl ai m ed th e di sm is sa l of th e co un te rcl ai m fo r la ck

of pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on di d no t co ns ti tu te a de ni al o f in jun ct iv e rel ie f im m ed ia te ly

ap pe al ab le un de r th e te rm s of th e su bs ta nt ia ll y id en ti ca l pr ed eces so r of 28 U.S.C.

§ 12 92 (a)( 1)

. The Si xt h Ci rcu it di sa gr ee d

, e x erci se d ap pe ll at e juri sd ic ti on , an d

rev ers ed th e di st ric t co ur t

. See id

. at 43 1. Afte r gr an ti ng a writ of cert io rari

, th e

Su pr em e Co ur t affi rm ed th e Si xt h Ci rcu it 's ex erci se of ap pe ll at e juri sd ic ti on ov er th e

or de r di sm is si ng th e co un te rcl ai m for lac k o f pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on , st at in g

by th ei r m ot io n to di sm is s, pl ai nt iff s th em se lv es br ou gh t on fo r he ari ng th e ve ry qu es ti on th at

, am on g ot he rs , wou ld ha ve be en pr es en te d to th e

co ur t up on f

o r m al ap pl ic at io n fo r an in te rlo cu to ry in jun ct io n.

. . . It

can no t be sa id

, in de ed pl ai nt iff s do no t cl ai m , th at th e di sm is sa l di d no t

-8

-de n y to de fen da nt s th e pr ot ect io n of th e in jun ct io n pr ay ed in th ei r

an swe r.

Id . at 4 33

.

Im po rta nt ly fo r ou r pu rp os es , Cars on de sc rib ed Gen eral Elec tri c as in vo lv in g

an or de r of di sm is sa l whi ch was su bjec t to

, an d sa ti sf i e d

, t h e du al in qu iry of (1 )

ha vi ng a se rio us , pe rh ap s irr ep a r a b l e c on se qu en ce (2 ) th at co ul d no t be effe ct ua ll y

ch al le ng ed un le ss an ap pe al was im m ed ia te ly ta ke n. See Cars on , 45 0 U.S. at 86 n.1 1.

Thi s cas e, li ke Gen eral Elec tri c, in vo lv es an or de r of di sm is sa l ag ai ns t a pa rty fo r la ck

of pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on whi ch ha d th e effe ct of de nyin g th e ot he r pa rty th e pr ot ect io n

of an in jun ct io n ag ai ns t th e di sm is se d pa rty. As a res ul t, we are co nf id en t th e di st ric t

co ur t o rd er d is m is si ng CarM ik e fo r la ck of p ers on al juri sd ic ti on is li ke wis e su bjec t

to Cars on 's re qu ire m en ts be fo re we ca n e xe rci se ap pe ll at e juri sd ic ti on ov er i t. 2

The or de r di sm is si ng CarM ik e fo r la ck of pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on do es no t sa ti sf y

Cars on 's req ui rem en ts be cau se th e di sm is sa l or de r wil l no t res ul t in irr ep arab le

co ns eq ue nc es if it is no t im m ed ia te ly ap pe al ed

. To be gi n wit h, CarM ik e's di sm is sa l

fro m th is cas e do es no t pr ev en t Nov us fro m se ek in g in jun ct iv e rel ie f ag ai ns t CarM ik e

in a co ur t w h e re pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on ov er th e co rp or at io n sh ou ld no t be di sp ut ed

,

su ch as a st at e or fed eral co ur t in Virg in ia

. In a d d i t i o n , as Nov us it se lf arg ue s, th e

in jun ct io n a ga in st Dawso n a pp li es to th os e "i n acti ve co nc ert or pa rti ci pa ti on " with

The pr oc ed ur al po st ur e of th is cas e – whe re a pl ai nt iff ch al le ng es th e di sm is sa l 2

of on e de fen da nt fo r la ck of pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on as pa rt of an app eal fro m an or de r refu si ng in

jun ct iv e rel ie f ag ai ns t a se pa rat e de fen da nt – is di st in ct fro m th e si tu at io n whe re a de fen da nt ag ai ns t who m an in jun ct i o n i s en te red im

m ed ia te ly ap pe al s th e

o rd er gr an ti ng th e in

jun ct io n an d al so cl ai m s th e di st ric t co ur t erre d in ex e r c i s i n g

pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on ov er hi m or he r. In su ch a si tu at io n, t h e a p p el la te co ur t m us t

ne ces sa ril y ad dr es s th e pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on is su e to de te rm in e whe th er th e di st ric t

co ur t ha d au th or it y to en te r th e in jun ct io n. See Lan d- O-Nod Co

. v. Bas se tt Fu rn it ur e In du s., In c., 70 8 F .2d 13 38 , 13 40 (8t h C ir. 1 98 3)

.

-9

-Dawso n, Fed . R . C iv . P . R ul e 65 (d )(2 )(C) , wh ic h cert ai nl y wou ld in cl ud e Car Mi ke

if Dawso n cau se d CarM ik e to us e Nov us 's m ark s an d pr od uc ts in vi ol at io n of th e

in jun ct io n. Bec au se Nov us can , if ne ces sa ry , pu rs ue al te rn at e av en ue s to effe ct iv el y

en joi n CarM ik e, CarM ik e's di sm is sa l fro m th is su it do es no t res ul t in irr ep arab le

co ns eq ue nc es su ch th at an im m ed ia te ap pe al is req ui red to effe ct ua ll y ch al le ng e th e

di st ric t co ur t's de ci si on

.

The or de r d i s mi ss in g CarM ik e wou ld al so be rev ie wab le if it were

"i ne xt ric ab ly int ert win ed " wi th th e d is tri ct co ur t's pa rti al gra nt an d p art ia l d en ia l o f

Nov us 's cl ai m fo r in

jun ct iv e rel ie f. See Man io n v. Nag in

, 25 5 F.3 d 53 5, 54 0 (8 th Ci r.

20 01 ) (rec og ni zi ng ap pe ll at e juri sd ic ti on ex is ts un de r 28 U.S.C. § 12 92 (a)( 1) fo r

is su es in ex tri cab ly in te rtwi ne d wit h th e de ni al of a pr el im in ary in jun ct io n) ; Newto n

Cn ty. W il dl ife Ass 'n v. Uni te d St at es Fo res t Serv

., 11 3 F.3 d. 11 0, 11 6 (8 th Ci r. 19 97 )
(s am e). "[ A ] pe nd en t ap pe ll at e cl ai m can be reg ard ed as in ex tri cab ly in te rtwi ne d wit h

a pr op er l y r e v ie wab le cl ai m on co ll at eral ap pe al on ly if th e pe nd en t cl ai m is

co te rm in ou s wit h, or su bs u med i n , th e cl ai m be fo re th e co ur t on in te rlo cu to ry

ap pe al [.]" Kin cad e v. Ci ty of Bl ue Sp rin gs , 64 F.3 d 38 9, 39 4 (8 th Ci r. 19 95 ) (q uo ti ng

Mo or e v . Cit y

of Wy nn ewo od , 57 F.3d 92 4, 9 30 (10 th Cir . 19 95 )).

The is su e whe th er Mi nn es ot a co ur ts ha ve pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on ov er CarM ik e

is an an al y ti cal ly se pa rat e in qu iry fro m whe th er Nov us is en ti tl ed to in jun ct iv e rel ie f

ag a i n s t D a w s on or CarM ik e. The res ol ut io n of Nov us 's ap pe al of th e pr el im in ary

in jun ct io n do es no t "n eces sa ril y res ol ve " th e qu es ti on whe th er th e di st ric t co ur t erre d

in di sm is si ng CarM ik e fo r la ck of pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on

. See id

. (in di cat in g a pe nd en t

cl a i m is no t su bs um ed in th e cl ai m be fo re th e co ur t on in te rlo cu to ry ap pe al un le ss "ap pe ll at e res ol ut io n o f th e co ll at eral ap pe al ne ces sa ril y res ol ve s th e pe nd en t cl ai m

as well ") (q uo ti ng Mo or e, 57 F.3 d at 93 0)

. The "i ne xt ric ab ly in te rtwi ne d" pr in ci pl e

do es no t crea te ap pe ll at e juri sd ic ti on ov er CarM ik e's di sm is sa l ei th er. W e th eref or e

la ck ap pe ll at e ju r i sd ic ti on ov er Nov us 's cl ai m th at th e di st ric t co ur t erre d in

di sm is si ng CarM ik e fo r la ck of pe rs on a l juri sd ic ti on , an d di sm is s th at pa rt of th e

ap pe al

.

-1 0-W e ne xt ad dr es s whet he r ap pe ll at e juri sd ic ti on ex is ts ov er No vu s's ap pe al of

th e di st ric t co ur t or de r gr an ti ng Dawso n an ad di ti on al si xt y da y s t o fi le an an swe r.

Thi s i s an in te rlo cu to ry de ci si on th at cl earl y do es no t fal l wit hi n th e co nt ou rs of 2 8

U.S.C. § 12 92 (a)( 1)

, an d th us th ere is ap pe ll at e juri sd ic ti on ov er th is cl ai m on ly if it

is in ex tri cab ly in te rtwi ne d wit h th e pr op erl y rev ie wab le cl ai m in vo lv in g th e

pr el im in ary in

jun ct io n. See Man io n, 25 5 F.3 d at 54 0. Nov us 's ap pe al of th is as pe ct

of th e di st ric t co ur t's or de r su ffer s th e sa m e fat e as th e ap pe al of th e or de r di sm is si ng

CarM ik e fo r la ck of pe rs on al juri sd ic ti on

. The res ol ut io n of th e qu es ti on whe th er th e

di st ric t co ur t ab us ed it s d is cret io n in refu si ng to en fo rce th e no n- co m pe te cl au se as

pa rt of it s in

jun ct iv e rel ie f do e s no t ne ces sa ril y res ol ve th e qu es ti on whe th er th e

di st ric t co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n whe n it ga ve Dawso n an ex te ns io n o f t i me in

whi ch to an swe r th e co m

pl ai nt

. W e th eref

or e di sm is s th is pa rt of th e ap pe al fo r la ck

of ap pe ll at e juri sd ic ti on as we ll

.

III

Fi na l l y, w e a dd res s th e di st ric t co ur t's refu sa l to en fo rce th e 20 08 fran ch is e

ag reem en t's no n

- c o mp et e cl au se as pa rt of th e pr el im in ary in jun ct io n. "We r ev ie w

th e de ni al of a m ot io n fo r pr el im in ary in jun ct io n fo r ab us e of di sc ret io n." Co y ne 's &

Co

., In c. v. Ene sc o, L.L.C., 55 3 F.3 d 11 28

, 11 31 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ). "A di st ric t co ur t ha s

br oa d di sc ret io n whe n ru li ng o n a r e q u e s t fo r pr el im in ary in jun ct io n, an d it wil l be

rev ers ed on ly fo r cl earl y erro ne ou s fact ua l de te rm in at io ns , an erro r o f l aw, or an

ab us e of it s di sc ret io n." Aaro n v. Targ et Co rp ., 35 7 F.3 d 7 68

, 77 3- 74 (8 th Ci r.

20 04 ). An ab us e of di sc ret io n oc cu rs whe n "a rel ev an t fact or th at sh ou ld ha ve be en gi ve n s ig ni fic an t wei gh t i s n ot co ns id ered ; whe n an irr el ev an t o r im pr op er fa ct or is

co ns id ered an d gi ve n si gn ifi can t weig ht ; an d whe n al l pr o p e r fact or s, an d no

im pr op er on es , are co ns id ered

, bu t th e co ur t, in weig hi ng th os e fact or s, co m m it s a

cl ear erro r of ju d g men t

. " Kern v. TXO Pro d. Co rp ., 73 8 F.2 d 96 8, 97 0 (8 th Ci r.

19 84 ).

-1 1-Req ue st s fo r pr el im ina ry inj unc tion are an al y zed un de r th e fo ur fact or s se t fo rth

in Data ph as e Sy st em s, In c. v. CL Syste m s, In c., 64 0 F .2d 10 9 (8 th Ci r. 19 81 ). The

Data ph as e fact or s are "(1 ) th e th reat of irr ep arab le ha rm to th e m ov an t; (2 ) th e st at e

of ba la nc e be twee n th is ha rm an d th e i n jury th at gr an ti ng th e in

jun ct io n wil l in fli ct

on ot he r pa rti es li ti ga nt ; (3 ) th e pr ob ab il it y th at m ov an t wil l su ccee d on th e m eri ts ;

an d (4 ) th e pu bl ic in te res t." Id

. at 11 4

. I n r e f u s in g to en fo rce th e 20 08 fran ch is e

ag reem en t's no n- co m

pe te cl au se , th e di st ric t co ur t fo cu se d on th e irr ep arab le ha rm

fact or

. Bec au se a "fa il ur e to sh ow irr ep arab le ha rm is an in de pe nd en tl y su ffi ci en t

gr ou nd up on whi ch to de ny a pr el im in ary in jun ct io n," W at ki ns In c. v. Le w is

, 34 6

F.3 d 84 1, 84 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 03 ), we li ke wis e fo cu s on th is fact or to de te rm in e whe th er

th e d is tri ct co ur t ab us ed it s d is cret io n i n t hi s i ns ta nc e.

Nov us cl ai m s th e di st ric t co ur t ab us ed it s di sc ret io n whe n it de te rm in ed Nov us

wou ld no t su ffer irr ep arab le ha rm be cau se Mi nn es ot a c o u rts in fer irr ep arab le ha rm

fro m th e br each of a va li d an d en fo rcea bl e no n- co m pe te cl au se

. See Edi n v. Jo st en s,

In c., 34 3 N.W .2d 69 1, 69 4 (Mi nn

. Ct

. App

. 19 84 ) ("I n a pr op er cas e irr ep arab le ha rm

to th e em pl oyer m ay be in ferr ed if it can be s h o w n th at th e em pl oyee br each ed an

en fo rcea bl e res tri ct iv e co ve na nt ."). Dawso n co un te rs th at Nov us is no t en ti tl ed to an

in fere nc e o f ir rep arab le ha rm in th is cas e fo r two reas on s.

Fi rs t, D aw son ar gue s a rece nt Su pr em e Co ur t de ci si on un de rm in es Mi nn es ot a's

ru le of in ferr in g irr ep arab le ha rm

. In eBa y , In c. v. Mer cEx ch an ge , L.L.C., 54 7 U.S.

38 8 (2 00 6)

, th e Su pr em e Co ur t reject ed a "g en eral ru le th at co ur ts w i l l i s s ue

pe rm an en t inj unc tio ns ag ai nst pa te nt inf ri nge m en t ab se nt ex ce pti ona l ci rc um sta nc es

. "

Id

. at 39 1. The Co ur t ex pl ai ne d th at it "h as co ns is te nt ly reject ed in vi ta ti on s to rep la ce

t rad it io na l eq ui ta bl e co ns id erat io ns wit h a ru le th at an in jun ct io n au to m at ic a l l y

fo ll ows a de te rm in at io n th at a co pyrig ht ha s be en in fri ng ed ." Id

. at 39 2- 93

. Dawso n

arg ue s eBay 's ho ld in g req ui res co ur ts to vi ew as su sp ect an y ge ne ral rul e crea ti ng a

pr es um pt io n or a n i n f

e ren ce in fav or of au to m at ic al ly im po si ng an in

jun ct io n.

In de ed

, th e Elev en th Ci rcu it ha s s u g ge st ed "a st ro ng cas e can be m ad e th at eBa y 's

-1 2-ho ld in g ne ces sa ril y ex te nd s to th e gr an t of pr el im in ary in jun ct io ns " in co nt ex ts ot he r

th an pa te nt in fri ng em en t cas es

. Nor th Am . M ed . C or p. v. Ax i o m Wor ld wid e, In c.,

52 2 F.3 d 12 11

, 12 28 (1 1t h Ci r. 20 08 ) (co ns id eri ng , bu t ul ti m at el y no t de c i d i ng ,

w h e th er eBa y 's pr oh ib it io n ag ai ns t pr es um pt io ns wou ld ap pl y to a pr el im in ar y

in jun ct io n u nd er t he Lanh am Act) ; see als o Sali ng er v. Co lt in g, 6 07 F.3d 68 , 77 -7 8
(2 d Ci r. 20 10 ) (ap pl y in g eBa y 's ho ld in g to pr el im in ary in jun ct io ns is su ed fo r al le ge d

co pyrig ht in fri ng em en t); Seed Serv s., In c. v. W in so r Grai n, In c., 86 8 F. Su pp

. 2d 99 8,

10 05 (E.D. Cal. 2 01 2) (refu si ng to "as su m e th e ex is te nc e o f ir rep arab le in jury" in a

tra de m ark in fri ng em en t ca se ba se d o n e Bay).

Seco nd

, Dawso n arg ue s th e lo ng de la y be twee n th e ti m e he st op pe d pa yi n g

ro y al ti es an d th e ti m e Nov us fin al ly so ug ht in jun ct iv e rel ie f

– a pe rio d of se ve nt een

m on th s

– r e b u ts an y in fere nc e of irr ep arab le ha rm Nov us m ay ha ve ha d un de r th e

pa rti cu la r fact s of thi s case

. Fo r th is pr op os it io n, Dawso n rel ie s pr im ari ly up on ou r

de ci si on in Hub ba rd Feed s, In c. v. Ani m al Feed Su pp le m en t, In c., 18 2 F.3 d 59 8 (8 th

Ci r. 19 99 ). The re we affi rm ed a di st ric t co ur t's de ni al of a req ue st fo r a pr el im in ary

in jun ct io n, fo cu si ng in la rg e pa rt on th e pl ai nt iff 's de la y of ni ne y ears in as se rti ng th at

an ot he r co m

pa ny was us in g it s reg is te red pr od uc t wit ho ut pe rm is si on

. Id

. at 60 3. W e

al so ci te d wit h a p p r o v a l th e Seco nd Ci rcu it 's de ci si on in Tou gh Trav el er, Ltd

. v.

Out bo un d Pro du ct s, 60 F.3 d 96 4 (2 d Ci r. 19 95 ), whe re th e co ur t sa id de la y al on e m ay jus ti fy th e de ni al of a pr el im in ary in jun ct io n whe n th e de la y is in ex pl ai na bl e in li gh t

of a pl ai nt iff

's kn owl ed ge of th e co nd uc t of th e de fen da nt

. Id

. at 96 8 (ci ti ng Ci ti ba nk

, N.A. v. Ci tytru s t

, 7 5 6 F.2 d 27 3, 27 6 (2 d Ci r. 19 85 ) (co nc lu di ng a de la y of ni ne

mo n t h s aft er rece iv in g no ti ce of a de fen da nt 's co nd uc t al le ge d to be cau si n g

irr ep arab le ha rm jus ti fie d de ni al of a pr el im in ary in jun ct io n) ); see al so CHS, In c. v.

Pet ro Net, L.L.C., Ci v. No. 10 -9 4 RHK/F LN, 20 10 W L 47 21 07 3 at *3 (D. Mi nn

. Nov

. 15

, 20 10 ) ("I t ha s lo ng be en reco gn iz ed th at de la y in se ek in g rel ie f 'vi ti at es m uc h of

th e fo rce of

. . . al le ga ti on s of irr ep arab le ha rm .'" (q uo ti ng Bea m e v. Fri en ds o f th e

Eart h, 4 34 U.S. 13 10 , 13 13 (19 77 ))).

-1 3-In ad di ti on to th es e two arg um en ts co un te rin g Nov us 's cl ai m th at it is en ti tl ed

to a pr es um

pt io n of irr ep arab le ha rm un de r Mi nn es ot a la w, Dawso n al so co nt en ds th e

pa rti cu la r ha rm Nov us al le ge s – da m ag e to th e in te gr it y of it s fran ch is e syst em – is

n o t i r r ep arab le be cau se it is to o sp ecu la ti ve

. See Anytim e Fi tn es s, In c. v. Fami l y

Fi tn es s of Ro y al

, L.L.C., No. 09 -3 50 3, 20 10 WL 1 4 5 25 9 at * 2 (D. Mi nn

. Ja n. 8,

20 10 ) (co nc lu di ng a co nc ern ab ou t fran ch is e in te gr it y "i s sp ecu la ti ve " an d "s uc ces s

on th e m eri ts

. . . wo ul d di ss ua de . . . fra nc hi se es fro m ig no rin g th ei r ag reem en ts ");

Nov us Fran ch is in g, Inc. v. Dean , No. 1 0- 28 34 , 20 11 W L 12 61 62 6 a t * 3 (D. Mi nn

. Mar

. 30

, 20 11 ) ("No vu s ob jects th at th e po te nt ia l da m ag e to th e in te gr it y of it s

fran ch is in g syste m co ns ti tu te s irr ep arab le ha rm

. It arg ue s th at fai lu re to en joi n th e

Dean s wil l cau se fran ch is ees aro un d th e co un try to vi ol a t e th ei r no n- co m pe te

ag reem en ts

. Howev er, th is po te nt ia l is si m il arl y sp ecu la ti ve

. The Mag is tra te Ju dg e

ap pr op ria te ly no te d th at su cces s on th e m eri ts of th e cl ai m is th e pr op er de te rren t fo r

th is po te nt ia l h arm , no t i nju nc ti ve rel ie f.").

Afte r co ns id eri ng al l of th e arg um en ts m ad e by bo th pa rti es fo r an d ag ai ns t th e

ne ed fo r a pr el im in ary in

jun ct io n to en fo rce th e no n- co m pe te cl au se , we co nc lu de th e

di st ric t co ur t di d no t ab us e it s di sc ret io n whe n it de te rm in ed Nov u s f a il ed to sh ow

irr ep arab le ha rm un de r th e pa rti cu la r fact s in vo lv ed in th is cas e. " I n o r d e r to

de m on st rat e irr ep arab le ha rm , a pa rty m us t sh ow t h a t th e ha rm is cert ai n an d gr eat

an d of su ch im m in en ce th at t h e r e is a cl ear an d pr es en t ne ed fo r eq ui ta bl e rel ie f."

Io wa Uti ls

. Bd

. v. Fed

. Co m m c'n s Co m

m 'n, 10 9 F.3 d 41 8, 42 5 (8 th Ci r. 19 96 ). At a

m in im um , Nov us 's fai lu re to se ek in jun ct iv e rel ie f fo r a pe rio d of se ve nt een m on th s

aft er Dawso n qu it pa y ing ro y al ti es "v it ia te s m uc h of th e fo rce of [No vu s's ] al le ga ti on s

of irr ep arab le ha rm ." Bea m e, 43 4 U.S. at 13 13

. Fu rth erm or e, we qu es ti on whe th er

Nov us 's al le ge d in

juri es , i.e., "a lo ss of cu st om ers or cu st om er go od wil l," App el la nt 's

Br. at 36

, are tru ly "i rrep arab le " in th e se ns e th at th ey co ul d no t be ad dr es se d th ro ug h

m o n e y d am ag es if Nov us is su cces sf ul fo ll owi ng a tri al on th e m eri ts

. Cf. Gen

. Mo to rs Co rp

. v. Harry Bro wn's

, L.L.C., 56 3 F.3 d 31 2, 31 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (aff irming

a di s t r i c t c o u rt' s de ni al of a pr el im in ary in jun ct io n whe re th e di st ric t co ur t "d id no t

-1 4-c l e a rly err" by fin di ng ha rm fro m "l os t cu st om er rel at io ns hi ps was eq ui va le nt to a

cl ai m of l os t p ro fit s" an d " co ul d t he refo re b e co m pe ns at ed " as m on ey

da m ag es ). 3

Ult im at el y , ou r de ci si on to affi rm is dr iv en by th e rel ev an t st an da rd of rev ie w.

W e ha ve no t id en ti fie d an y rel ev an t fact or s th e di st ric t co ur t sh ou ld ha ve co ns id ered

bu t di d no t, no r an y im

pr op er fact or s th at sh ou ld no t ha ve be en co ns id ered bu t were,

no r an y cl ear erro r of jud gm en t on th e pa rt of th e di st ric t co ur t. Th e a b us e-o fdi sc ret io n st an da rd m ean s "t he co ur t ha s a ran ge of ch oi ce, an d th at it s de ci si on wil l

no t be di st ur

be d as lo n g a s i t s t a y s wit hi n th at ran ge an d is no t in flu en ced by an y

m is ta ke of la w." Kern

, 73 8 F.2 d at 97 0; se e al so Aaro n v. Targ et Co rp ., 35 7 F.3 d at

77 4 (ref erri ng to t h i s " ran ge -o f-ch oi ce" pr in ci pl e whe n rev ie win g a pr el im in ary

in jun ct io n or de r). "Th at th e de ni al of [a m ot io n fo r a pr el im in ary in jun ct io n] wou ld

no t ha ve be en rev ers ib le as an ab us e of di sc r e t i o n , h owe ve r, do es no t m ean th at

gr an ti ng it was su ch an ab us e. The ve ry co nc ep t of di sc ret io n pr es up po se s a zo ne of

ch oi ce wit hi n whi ch th e tri al co ur ts m ay go ei th er way ." K e r n , 7 3 8 F.2 d at 97 1.

Here, th e fact th at th e di st ric t co ur t ch os e no t t o en fo rce th e no n- co m pe te cl au se as

pa rt of a pr el im in ary in

jun ct io n do es no t fall ou ts id e th e ran ge of t he di st ric t cou rt' s

pe rm is si bl e ch oi ces

.

IV

W e la ck appe ll at e juri sd ic ti on ov er th e ap pe al of th e or de r di sm is si ng CarM ik e,

an d th eref

or e di sm is s th at pa rt of th e ap pe al

. W e li ke wis e di sm is s th e ap pe al of th e

o r d e r gr an ti ng Dawso n an ex te ns io n of ti m e to fil e an an swe r fo r th e sa m e rea s o n

. W e aff irm th e d is tri ct co ur t's pre li m in ary in jun ct io n o rd er.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

Hav in g de ci de d th e de la y in vo lv ed in th is pa rti cu la r cas e reb ut s an y in fere nc e 3

of irr ep arab le ha rm to whi ch Nov us m ay ha ve be en en ti tl ed un de r Mi nn es ot a la w, we do no t ad dr es s Dawso n's cl ai m th at Mi nn es ot a la w co nf li ct s wit h th e Su pr em e Co ur t's
de ci si on in eBay.

-1 5-