Court Opinion

ID: 179470
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-11-18 21:12:47+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:29:15.099603
License: Public Domain

l NOTE: This order is n0nprecedential.
Un1ted States Court of AppeaIs
for the Federal Circuit
CREATIVE COMPOUNDS, LLC,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
V.
STARMARK LABORATORIES,
Defendant-Appellee. '
2010-1445
Appea1 from the United States District Court for the
Southern District of F1orida in case n0. 07-CV-22814,
Judge A1an S. Go1d.
ON MOTION
B<-efore GAJARsA, ScHALL, and M00RE, Circuit Ju,dges.
SCHALL, Circuit Judge.
ORDER
Creative Co1npounds, LLC moves for a stay, pending
disposition of this appea1, of the permanent injunction
entered by the United States District C0urt for the South-
ern District of F1orida. Star1nark Lab0rat0ries 0pposes.
Creative replies Starmark moves for attorney fees and

CREATIVE COMPOU`NDS V. STARMARK LAB 2
sanctions related to the motion for a stay and "Creative's
two prior premature appeals to this Court and a petition
for writ of mandamus." Creative opposes.
To obtain a stay, pending appeal, a movant must es-
tablish 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. Stcmdard Hcwens Prods. v. Gen,cor Indus., 897
F.2d 511, 513 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (citing Hilton u. BraunskiZZ,
481 U.S. 77O, 778 (1987)). In deciding whether to grant a
stay, 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. du Pont de
Nemours & C0. u. Phillips Petroleum Co., 835 F.2d 277,
278 (Fed. Cir. 1987); see also Standard Hcwens Prods.,
897 F.2d at 513. _
Based on the arguments in the motions papers, and
without prejudicing the ultimate disposition____ of this case
by a merits panel, we determine that Creative Com-
pounds has not met its burden to obtain a stay of the
permanent injunction We similarly determine that
Starmark has not demonstrated that sanctions and
attorney fees are warranted.
Upon consideration thereof,
IT ls 0RDERE:o THAT:
The motions are denied.
FOR THE COURT
NOV 1 8 2010 131 Jan norway
Date J an H0rbaly
Clerk
cc: MattheW A. Rosenberg, Esq.
Frederick A. Tecce, Esq. FILED
U.S. COURT 0F APPEALS FOR
THE FEDERAL C!RCUiT
NOV 1 8 2010
.lAN HORBALY
CLERK