Lowe v. ShieldMark, Inc.
Lowe v. ShieldMark, Inc.
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO ------------------------------------------------------------------ CLIFFORD A. LOWE, , OPINION & ORDER : [Related Doc. 229] Plaintiffs, : : vs. : : SHIELDMARK, INC., , : : Defendants. : ------------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE: In this patent infringement case, Plaintiffs Lowe and Spota LLC have filed an appeal and now move for the Court’s approval of a supersedeas bond in the amount of $224,000 and a stay of the execution of judgment pending resolution of the appeal. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 62(b), a party may obtain a stay as a matter of right by providing a bond or other security.1 “A district court has discretion to fix the amount of the bond or waive the bond requirement.”2 While Plaintiffs offered calculations supporting its $224,000 bond amount, those calculations did not consider the lost use of the judgment amount during the appeal pendency. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ motion to set a supersedeas bond but sets the bond amount at $235,000. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 23, 2023 JAMES S. GWIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
1 .,
345 F.3d 390, 409(6th Cir. 2003). This Court has jurisdiction over this motion .,
2020 WL 6746856, at *1 (D.N.J. Nov. 17, 2020). 2 ,
2021 WL 858728, at *2 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 8,
Reference
- Status
- Unknown