From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lashify, Inc. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
Jun 1, 2022
No. 2022-1566 (Fed. Cir. Jun. 1, 2022)

Opinion

2022-1566

06-01-2022

LASHIFY, INC., Appellant v. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, Appellee QINGDAO HOLLYREN COSMETICS CO., LTD, dba Hollyren, QINGDAO XIZI INTERNATIONAL TRADING CO., LTD, dba Xizi Lashes, QIANGDAO LASHBEAUTY COSMETIC CO., LTD, dba Worldbeauty, KISS NAIL PRODUCTS, INC., ULTASALON, COSMETICS & FRAGRANCE, INC., WALMART, INC., CVS PHARMACY, INC., ARTEMIS FAMILY BEGINNINGS, INC., dba Lilac Street, ALICIA ZENG, Intervenors


This order is nonprecedential.

Appeal from the United States International Trade Commission in Investigation No. 337-TA-1226.

ON MOTION

Before Lourie, Taranto, and Hughes, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Appellee International Trade Commission moves to dismiss Appeal No. 2022-1566 as premature. ECF No. 21. Lashify, Inc. opposes dismissal and requests instead that the appeal be held in abeyance. ECF No. 26.

Lashify filed a notice of appeal seeking review of the Commission's decision not to review certain non-infringement findings regarding U.S. Patent No. 10, 721, 984. ECF No. 1-2 at 2. But even Lashify's notice characterized the Commission's decision as not "final" for purposes of judicial review under Tessera, Inc. v. ITC, 646 F.3d 1357, 1367-69 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (citing 19 U.S.C. § 1337(c)), based on the Commission's pending consideration of certain other issues in the investigation. ECF No. 1-2 at 4. We agree with the parties that, under the circumstances of this case, we lack jurisdiction over Lashify's appeal because there has been no final determination. Having considered the parties' arguments, the court determines that dismissal (rather than a stay) is appropriate in this case, see, e.g., A & J Mfg., LLC v. ITC, 584 Fed.Appx. 933 (Fed. Cir. 2014), but the court will allow Lashify to reinstate its appeal if, within 60 days of the entry of this order, it appeals from a final determination.

Accordingly, It Is Ordered That:

(1) The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, subject, however, to reinstatement under the same docket number without payment of any additional filing fee if, within 60 days of the entry of this order, Lashify appeals from the entry of a final determination. The mandate shall issue simultaneously with this order.
(2) Each party shall bear its own costs.


Summaries of

Lashify, Inc. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
Jun 1, 2022
No. 2022-1566 (Fed. Cir. Jun. 1, 2022)
Case details for

Lashify, Inc. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n

Case Details

Full title:LASHIFY, INC., Appellant v. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, Appellee…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit

Date published: Jun 1, 2022

Citations

No. 2022-1566 (Fed. Cir. Jun. 1, 2022)