Opinion ID: 211104
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Contempt Hearing and Expansion of the Injunction

Text: 86 Lastly, EEI argues that the district court should have considered evidence and conducted further evidentiary hearings to determine whether PE wax was the equivalent of fatty acid wax and was therefore infringing. Contempt proceedings are appropriate as long as the new issue does not raise a substantial question of infringement. Additive Controls & Measurement Sys. v. Flowdata, Inc., 154 F.3d 1345, 1350 (Fed.Cir.1998). If an accused infringer merely makes colorable changes to the accused product that infringed, a court may properly extend the injunction to the new device and find the party in contempt. See id. at 1350-51. Here, the court heard testimony that PE wax was the same as C30 + wax and that they functioned similarly in this context. Thus, the court's decision to extend the injunction to encompass PE wax was not an abuse of discretion.