Contempt is Proper Proceeding for Violation of Permanent Injunction
The Eastern District of Missouri found a patent defendant in contempt in Litecubes, LLC v. Northern Light Products, Inc., 2007 WL 892459 (E.D. Mo. 3/21/07).
On October 7, 2005, the jury returned a verdict for Litecubes on its patent infringement claim against Northern Light (d/b/a GlowProducts). The court accordingly entered a permanent injunction, but Northern Light started selling a similar product.
Litecubes moved for sanctions, providing an expert report that the new product infringed the patent and violated the permanent injunction. The court held that the proper proceeding was a contempt proceeding. Northern Light did not contest the expert report. The court held Northern Light in contempt of the injunction and imposed a fine of $5,000 per day while the infringing product is being sold.
