GlasWeld Asks Judge to Uphold Sanctions Against Boyles

GlasWeld’s attorney has filed a motion asking the judge to deny Mike Boyle, doing business as Surface Dynamix, and his son’s Christopher, motion to reconsider sanctions. The judge of the U.S. District Court of Oregon, Eugene division, had ordered sanctions against the Boyles in the form of attorney’s fees.

“The lengthy and convoluted procedural history of this case and the parties’ disputes are well-documented by plaintiff’s filings and the docket of record,” according to the judge’s order to impose sanctions.

“[T]he fact remains that defendants failed to comply with the court’s order of April 28 after being warned of sanctions for non-compliance … These actions warrant the imposition of sanctions against defendants,” the judge wrote.

She ordered the defendants to pay plaintiff’s attorney fees incurred in attempting to obtain defendants’ expert reports from April 6, 2015 through May 4, 2015.

“Further, defendants shall pay plaintiff’s attorney fees incurred in moving for default judgment and for continuance of depositions,” according to court documents.

The Boyles requested the opportunity to be heard before monetary sanctions are levied.

“FRCP Rule 11c requires notice and reasonable opportunity to respond to an order to show cause before any penalty can be imposed,” the Boyles wrote in their motion.

GlasWeld’s attorney respond in court documents, writing, “GlasWeld asks that the court allow GlasWeld to first wait and see if defendants comply with the July 31, 2015 order an pay GlasWeld the awarded sanctions before GlasWeld makes the decision of whether to 1) proceed with its patent lost profits’ damages claim and provide such documents to defendants; or 2) withdraw its claim for patent lost profit damages claim.

“GlasWeld requests this leniency for two reasons. First, the court’s order has indicated the defendant’s ‘failure to comply with this order or any future order shall result in an order to show cause why default judgment should not be entered against them.’ And if defendants refuse to pay the awarded fees, then the need for GlasWeld to risk defendants’ misuse of GlasWeld’s highly confidential sensitive business information may be obviated by a default judgment,” according to court documents. “[S]econd, if defendants are unable to pay the awarded attorneys’ fees, which are a small fraction of the amount of damages that GlasWeld intends to prove at trial, then defendants will also be unable to pay any substantial damages award, and GlasWeld may prefer to proceed by just seeking an injunction against defendants.”

The judge has not issued any new decisions in the alleged patent infringement case at press time.

This article is from glassBYTEs™, the free e-newsletter that covers the latest auto glass industry news. Click HERE to sign up—there is no charge. Interested in a deeper dive? Free subscriptions to Auto Glass Repair and Replacement (AGRR) magazine in print or digital format are available. Subscribe at no charge HERE.

This entry was posted in glassBYTEs Original Story and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.