Aerodynamics Incorporated et al v. Caesars Entertainment Operating Company, Inc. et al

Filing 77

ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 72 Motion for Leave to File is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 23 Motion for Preliminary Injunction is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The 51 Certificate of Cash Deposit shall remain in place to secure this injunction. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 11/17/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TR)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3
4

AERODYNAMICS INCORPORATED, a
Michigan corporation; ADI HOLDINGS
COMPANY, INC., a Georgia corporation,

5
6

2:15-cv-01344-JAD-PAL
Order Granting Motion for Leave to File
Sur-reply [ECF 72] and Granting Limited
Preliminary Injunction [ECF 23]

Plaintiffs

7

v.

8

CAESARS ENTERTAINMENT
OPERATING COMPANY, INC., a Delaware
corporation; STEVEN MARKHOFF, an
individual; INTERNATIONAL
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS, LLC, a
Delaware corporation; VIA AIRLINES, INC.,
a Colorado corporation; VIA AIR, LLC, a
Delaware corporation; and AMOS VIZER, an
individual,

9
10
11
12
13

Defendants

14
15

ADI moved for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction enjoining the

16

defendants from acquiring, using, or disclosing any of ADI’s trade-secret information.1 After

17

considering the parties’ briefs and evidence, I granted a narrowly tailored temporary injunction

18

on ADI’s claims for breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secrets, and I set a briefing

19

schedule and hearing on the preliminary injunction portion of ADI’s motion.2 Once briefing on

20

the preliminary injunction portion of ADI’s motion was complete, the parties twice stipulated to

21

continue the preliminary injunction hearing3 (which was ultimately held on November 16, 2015)

22

and to extend the TRO until then.

23
24

ADI asks me to extend the temporary restraining order into a preliminary injunction order
pending trial and expand the order’s scope to include Caesars as an enjoined party and cover

25
26

1

ECF 23.

27

2

ECF 49, 49-1.

3

ECF 67, 71.

28

1

1

three additional ADI documents: Powerpoint PKG Proposal, Charter Agreement with Joe Gibbs

2

Racing, and Caesars Master Air Contract Summary.4 ADI also moved for leave to file a sur-

3

reply.5 Defendants oppose both of ADI’s motions.6

4

Discussion

5

In evaluating ADI’s motion for preliminary injunction, I reviewed and considered the

6

arguments and evidence that the parties submitted in conjunction with ADI’s motion for leave to

7

file a sur-reply. I thus grant ADI’s motion for leave to file a sur-reply.7

8
9

In order to obtain the extraordinary equitable remedy of preliminary injunctive relief, the
plaintiff “must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer

10

irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tops in his favor,

11

and that an injunction is in the public interest.”8 Having reviewed the parties’ briefs and

12

supporting declarations and exhibits, I find that, for the same reasons articulated in my order

13

granting limited temporary injunctive relief,9 ADI has met the standard for a narrowly tailored

14

preliminary injunction on its claims for breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secrets.

15

I incorporate those findings and conclusions, along with my statements on the record at the

16

November 16, 2015, hearing, as further bases for granting this narrowly tailored preliminary

17

injunction.

18

Defendants’ additional arguments and evidence have not persuaded me to depart from my

19

original findings that ADI has shown that: (1) it is likely to succeed on the merits of its breach of

20

contract and misappropriation claims; (2) it is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of

21

injunctive relief, (3) with a narrowly tailored order, the balance of equities tips in ADI’s favor;

22
23

4

ECF 60.

24

5

ECF 72.

25

6

ECF 53, 75.

26

7

ECF 72.

27

8

Winter v. Nat. Resources Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008).

9

ECF 49, 49-1.

28

2

1

and (4) there is no critical public interest that would be injured by a narrowly tailored order.

2

ADI’s additional arguments and evidence likewise have not swayed me to expand the scope of

3

injunctive relief to include Caesars as an enjoined party or ADI’s Powerpoint PKG Proposal,

4

Charter Agreement with Joe Gibbs Racing, and Caesars Master Air Contract Summary

5

documents.

6
7
8
9

Conclusion
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that ADI’s motion for leave to file a sur-reply
[ECF 72] is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that ADI’s motion for a preliminary injunction [ECF 23] is

10

GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Until further order of this court, Markhoff, Vizer,

11

IMS, Via Air, and Via Airlines are enjoined from acquiring, disclosing, or using any portion of

12

ADI’s: (1) FAA-approved manuals; (2) STM Master Charter Agreement; (3) Accounts

13

Receivable Report as of March 31, 2015; (4) information that ADI inserted into or submitted

14

with the ADI Cost Template for Caesars Operations Actual Budget October 14th 2014, including

15

the Crew Compensation Memorandum; (5) aircraft-lease agreements between ADI and aircraft

16

lessor Republic; (6) aircraft-lease agreements between ADI and aircraft lessor Cymus; (7) and

17

pool parts agreement between ADI and aircraft manufacturer and parts vendor Embraer. In all

18

other respects, the request for a preliminary injunction is denied.

19

The previously posted bond [ECF 51] shall remain in place to secure this injunction.

20

Dated this 17th day of November, 2015.

21

__________________________________
______________________
_
_
_
_
Jennifer A. Dorsey
nifer A. Dorsey
r
United States District Judge
ted
Judge
d

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3