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)

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