NPC v. Enviroengineering Products

• Court: District Court, D. New Hampshire
• Decided: July 10, 1997
• Docket: CV-97-053-M
• Status: Published

Opinion

NPC v. Enviroengineering Products CV-97-053-M 07/10/97 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

NPC Acquisition Corp., Inc., Plaintiff

v. Civil No. 97-53-M

Enviroengineering Products Co., Inc., and Jefferson Rubber Works, Inc., Defendants

O R D E R

Plaintiff, NPC Acguisition Corp., Inc. ("NPC"), is the

holder of United States Letters Patent No. 5,431,459 (the "'459

Patent"). The '459 patent describes a wedge band and seal

assembly, which is designed to effect a seal between a sewer pipe

and a reinforced concrete manhole riser. When a bolt on the

assembly is tightened, it forces wedges together, thereby

exerting outward pressure on a rubber boot. As the boot expands,

it creates a seal between the pipe and the manhole riser.

NPC claims that Jefferson Rubber Works, Inc., the

manufacturing arm of Enviroengineering Products Co., Inc.

("EPCO"), produces a product that infringes the '459 Patent. It

also says that EPCO markets and distributes the allegedly

infringing product. Presently pending before the court are NPC's

motion for a preliminary injunction and defendants' motion for

summary judgment. In its objection to defendants' motion for

summary judgment, NPC also moves the court to defer its ruling on defendants' motion, pending completion of additional discovery.

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f).

Discussion

In support of its Rule 56(f) motion, NPC claims that it "is

being denied access to facts essential to its opposition to the

summary judgment motion by having to file its objection in

advance of taking discovery." Plaintiff's Objection to Summary

Judgment (document no. 20), at 2. At the preliminary pretrial

conference, the parties discussed their relative positions on

this issue and the court informed counsel for NPC that it would

grant a Rule 56(f) motion if one were filed and properly

supported. Accordingly, NPC's Rule 56(f) motion is granted.

Defendants' motion for summary judgment is denied, with leave to

refile after the parties have completed preliminary discovery on

the issues raised in plaintiff's Rule 56(f) motion. Such

discovery shall be completed on or before October 31, 1997.

In light of the fact that NPC itself acknowledges that there

remain disputed issues of material fact which bear directly upon

its patent infringement claim, its motion for preliminary

injunction is denied without prejudice; on the record as it

presently stands, the court cannot conclude that there is a

reasonable likelihood that NPC will prevail on the merits of its

claim. Nevertheless, NPC may, if it so chooses, refile a motion

2 for preliminary injunction after its has completed additional

discovery and supplemented the record as appropriate.

Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, NPC's Rule 56(f) motion

(contained in document no. 20) is granted. Defendants' pending

motion for summary judgment (document no. 6) is denied, with

leave to refile after the parties have completed preliminary

discovery (October 31, 1997). Defendants' motion for leave to

file a reply to plaintiff's opposition to defendants' motion for

summary judgment (document no. 22) is denied as moot. NPC's

motion for preliminary injunction (document no. 2) is denied,

with leave to refile after the parties have completed preliminary

discovery.

SO ORDERED.

Steven J. McAuliffe United States District Judge

July 10, 1997

cc: Bruce W. Felmly, Esg. Daniel J. Bourgue, Esg. Robert w. Upton, II, Esg. Maurice E. Gauthier, Esg.