Acrow Corp. Of America v. United States ( 2011 )


Menu:
  • NOTE: ThiS order is nonprecedential
    United States Court of Appeals
    for the FederaI Circuit
    ACROW CORPORATI()N OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellant, ~'
    V.
    UNITED STATES,
    Defen,dant-Appellee,
    AND
    MABEY BRIDGE & SHORE, INC.,
    Defen,dant-Appellee. '
    2011-5035
    Appeal from the U11ited States C0u1't of Federal
    Claims in case n0. 10-CV-682, Judge Christine O.C.
    Mil1er.
    ON MOTION
    Bef0re GAJARSA, MAYER and PROST, Circuit Judges.
    GAJARSA, C'ircuit Judge.
    0 R D E R
    ACROW CORP 0F AMERICA V. US 2
    Acrow Corporation of America moves for an injunction
    pending appeal or alternatively for an expedited consid-
    eration of this appeal. The United States opposes. Acrow
    replies. The United States moves to dismiss the motion
    for an injunction as moot. Acrow opposes. The United
    States replies.
    Rule 8(a)(1)(C),(2) of the F ederal Rules of Appellate
    Procedure authorize this court to grant an injunction
    pending appeal in our discretion. Similar to a motion to
    stay a judgment or injunction pending appeal, which is
    authorized under the same rule, our determination is
    governed by four factors, the first two of which are the
    most critical: (1) whether the stay applicant had made a
    strong showing that he is likely to succeed on the merits;
    (2) whether the applicant will be irreparably injured
    absent a stay; (3) whether issuance of the stay will sub~
    stantially injure the other parties interested in the pro-
    ceeding; and (4) where the public interest liest Hilton u.
    Braunskill, 
    481 U.S. 770
    , 776 (1987).
    Upon consideration thereof
    lT IS ORDERED THATf
    (1) The motion for an injunction is denied.
    (2) The motion to dismiss the motion for an injunc-
    tion is denied.
    (3) The case will be placed on the next available oral
    argument calendar after the briefing is completed, which
    is the usual course
    FoR THE CoURT
    HAY 25 2011
    /s/ J an Horbaly
    Date J an Horbaly
    Clerk
    FILED
    U.S. COURT OF APPEM.S FOR
    THE FEDERAL CIRGUfT
    MAY 25 2011
    1AnuoPaALY
    tim
    3
    CC'
    S
    ACROW CORP OF AMERICA V. US
    Thomas A. Coulter, Esq.
    Lartease M. Tiff1th, Esq.
    David Z. Bodenheimer, Esq.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2011-5035.1

Judges: Gajarsa, Mayer, Prost

Filed Date: 5/25/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024