Arlington Industries v. Bridgeport Fittings

Filing 777

ORDER denying Arlington's motion for contempt & sanctions 644 . (See order for complete details.) Signed by Honorable Christopher C. Conner on 03/09/10. (ki)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ARLINGTON INDUSTRIES, INC.,

: CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:01-CV-0485 : Plaintiff : (CONSOLIDATED) : v. : (Judge Conner) : BRIDGEPORT FITTINGS, INC., : : Defendant : --------------------------------------------------------------------------BRIDGEPORT FITTINGS, INC., Consolidated Plaintiff v. ARLINGTON INDUSTRIES, INC., Consolidated Defendant : : : : : : : : :

ORDER AND NOW, this 9th day of March, 2010, upon consideration of the motion (Doc. 644) for contempt and sanctions, filed by Arlington Industries, Incorporated ("Arlington"), wherein Arlington requests that the court hold Bridgeport Fittings, Incorporated ("Bridgeport") in contempt for failure to comply with the confession of judgment and injunction (Doc. 270) entered on June 30, 2006, and upon further consideration of the memorandum and order of court (Doc. 776) issued on the date hereof, wherein the court stayed enforcement of the June 30, 2006 injunction pending appellate review of the above-captioned matter, it is hereby ORDERED

that the motion (Doc. 644) for contempt and sanctions is DENIED.1 See Maness v. Meyers, 419 U.S. 449, 458 (1975) (explaining that orders and judgments of the court must be complied with unless a party obtains a stay pending appeal); see also Harris v. City of Phila., 47 F.3d 1333, 1337 (3d Cir. 1995) (same).

S/ Christopher C. Conner CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER United States District Judge

Bridgeport has also filed a request (Doc. 728) for oral argument on Arlington's motion (Doc. 644) for contempt and sanctions. In light of the court's ruling, Bridgeport's request is denied as moot.

1