Opinion
2022-120
04-05-2022
CORE OPTICAL TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, Plaintiff-Respondent v. JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC., Defendant-Petitioner
This order is nonprecedential.
On Petition for Permission to Appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1292(b) from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in No. 3:21-cv-02428-VC, Judge Vince Chhabria.
Before Prost, Reyna and Cunningham, Circuit Judges.
ON PETITION
ORDER
Cunningham, Circuit Judge.
Juniper Networks, Inc. petitions for permission to appeal from an interlocutory order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California denying Juniper's motion to dismiss, which the district court certified pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Core Optical Technologies, LLC opposes the petition.
Under § 1292(b), a district court may certify that an order that is not otherwise appealable is one involving a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and for which an immediate appeal may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation. Ultimately, this court must exercise its own discretion in deciding whether to grant permission to appeal an interlocutory order. See In re Convertible Rowing Exerciser Pat. Litig., 903 F.2d 822, 822 (Fed. Cir. 1990). In this case, we conclude that we should not permit an interlocutory appeal.
Accordingly, It Is Ordered That:
The petition for permission to appeal is denied.
For the Court