FieldTurf USA, Inc. et al v. UBU Sports, Inc.
Filing
63
MOTION by Plaintiffs FieldTurf USA, Inc., Tarkett Inc. for judgment (Unopposed) (Attachments: # 1 Index of Exhibits, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Warner, Kevin)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
FIELDTURF USA, INC., a Florida
corporation; TARKETT INC., a Canadian
corporation,
Case No. 1:16-cv-5572
Hon. John Z. Lee
Plaintiffs,
v.
UBU Sports, Inc., a Delaware corporation,
Jury Demanded
Defendant.
FIELDTURF’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58(d), FieldTurf, by and through its attorneys,
respectfully requests that this Court set out in a separate document, in the form of Exhibit 1 to this
motion, the final judgment this Court entered in FieldTurf’s favor. In support of this motion,
FieldTurf states as follows:
1.
On March 29, 2017, FieldTurf moved for default judgment. (Dkt. 48.)
2.
On May 3, 2017, the Court held a hearing on FieldTurf’s motion for entry of default
judgment. At the hearing, the Court granted FieldTurf’s motion. (See Dkt. 62.)
3.
Also on May 3, 2017, the Court entered final judgment in favor of FieldTurf in a
minute entry, which read: “MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Z. Lee: Status and motion
hearing held on 5/3/17. Defendant is not present. For the reasons stated on the record, Plaintiffs
motion for entry of default and default judgment against Defendant and for dismissal of
Defendant’s counterclaims with prejudice for want of prosecution 48 is granted in part and denied
in part. Judgment is entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the Defendant UBU Sports, Inv.
in the amount of 780,000.00 The request for attorney fees is denied. Enter order. Civil case
terminated. Mailed notice (ca, ) (Entered: 05/03/2017).” (Dkt. 60.)
4.
It is FieldTurf’s understanding that the May 3, 2017 minute entry constitutes a valid
and enforceable final judgment in its favor on its claim for willful patent infringement.
5.
Even so, FieldTurf respectfully requests that the Court issue a final judgment in the
form of Exhibit 1 to this motion. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58(d) provides that “[a] party
may request that judgment be set out in a separate document as required by Rule 58(a).” In turn,
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 58(a) provides that “[e]very judgment and amended
judgment must be set out in a separate document . . . .”
6.
Per the Court’s request in a June 1, 2017 email, FieldTurf’s request for the entry of
its proposed judgment is made via this motion.
7.
FieldTurf’s request is made in an abundance of caution, to resolve any possible
doubts about whether the Court’s minute entry satisfies the “separate document” requirement. See,
e.g., Perry v. Sheet Metal Workers’ Local No. 73 Pension Fund, 585 F.3d 358, 361 (7th Cir. 2009)
(noting that “some minute entries might satisfy the ‘separate document’ requirement” of Rule 58
(emphasis added)).
8.
FieldTurf conferred with Stan Sneeringer, counsel for Defendant UBU Sports, Inc.
before filing this motion. Mr. Sneeringer represented that his client does not oppose FieldTurf’s
request that the Court enter judgment in the form of Exhibit 1 to this motion.
WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated above, FieldTurf respectfully requests that the Court
issue a final judgment in its favor in the form of Exhibit 1 to this motion.
-2-
Dated: June 5, 2017
Respectfully submitted,
WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
By: /s/ Kevin E. Warner
One of the Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Michael L. Brody
Kevin E. Warner
Patrick R. O’Meara
WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
35 W. Wacker Dr.
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Phone: 312-558-5600
Fax: 312-558-5700
E-mail: kwarner@winston.com
Counsel for Plaintiffs
-3-
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served on this
5th day of June, 2017 via CM/ECF on the following:
Stan C. Sneeringer
PEDERSEN & HOUPT, P. C.
161 North Clark Street, Suite 2700
Chicago, Illinois 60601-3224
Phone: (312) 261-2238
Facsimile: (312) 261-1238
ssneeringer@pedersenhoupt.com
By: /s/ Patrick O’Meara
One of the Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?