Digest of Celgard, LLC v. LG Chem. Am., No. 2014-1645 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 12, 2015) (non- precedential). On appeal from W.D.N.C. Before O’Malley, Wallach, and Hughes.
Procedural Posture: Patent holder, Celgard, sued LG asserting patent infringement. CAFC reversed the district court’s entry of the preliminary injunction and remanded for further proceedings related to personal jurisdiction.
- Jurisdiction- Personal Jurisdiction: CAFC found that the district court legally erred by failing to consider either whether it had personal jurisdiction, or a substantial probability that it had personal jurisdiction, before granting the preliminary injunction. The CAFC reasoned that the district court cannot enjoin a party if it does not have jurisdiction over that party.
- Injunctions- Preliminary Injunctions: CAFC determined that at least three of the four factors (irreparable harm, balance of the equities, and public interest) necessary for a preliminary injunction were not established by Celgard and that these factors, as well as the legal error by the district court in failing to first address personal jurisdiction, weighed against entry of a preliminary injunction. CAFC held that the district court erred in granting the patent holder’s motion for a preliminary injunction.