Eko Brands v. Adrian Rivera Maynez Enterprises Inc et al

Filing 165

ORDER denying defendants' 162 Motion for Reconsideration, signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (SWT)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 _______________________________________ ) EKO BRANDS, INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) ) ADRIAN RIVERA MAYNEZ ) ENTERPRISES, INC., and ADRIAN RIVERA, ) ) Defendants. ) _______________________________________) Case No. C15-522RSL ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 13 This matter comes before the Court on defendants’ “Motion for Reconsideration.” Dkt. 14 # 162. On November 14, 2017, the Court rejected defendants’ contention that, because its 15 products do not include the single serve beverage brewer described in the introductory paragraph 16 to claim 8 of the ‘855 patent, they cannot infringe. Defendants argue that this finding constitutes 17 manifest error and should be reconsidered under LCR 7(h)(1). While it is undoubtedly true that 18 the description of the brewer with which plaintiff’s invention is intended to be used adds clarity 19 to the description of the invention, it does not define the invention. The fact that defendants’ 20 products do not include a single server beverage brewer does not prevent a finding that 21 defendants infringed the ‘855 patent. The motion for reconsideration is DENIED. 22 23 Dated this 4th day of December, 2017. 24 A 25 Robert S. Lasnik United States District Judge 26 ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

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?