Court Extinguishes Firetrace Injunction Demands

Posted on | May 29, 2008 | No Comments

2008-1379 Firetrace USA v. Jesclard
D/AZ 07-2001

Patentee Firetrace appeals from Judge Roslyn Silver’s order denying its motion for permanent injunction. 

The case is a little odd in that the permanent injunction was heard and decided before liability or the merits of the claims.  The court’s ruling stated, in full:

A permanent injunction hearing was held on March 4, 5, 6, and 11, 2008. After review of the papers filed, evidence, and law, the request for a permanent injunction will be denied. The issue of liability remains pending and will be decided when the findings of fact and conclusions of law are issued. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED the request for a permanent injunction is DENIED.

Unfortunately, nearly the entire case and record was filed under seal, but this much is known.

Firetrace is in the business of manufacturing fire suppression and protection products for use around fuel tanks in military and civilian aircraft and vehicles.  One of its products is FIRE Panel, is described on its web-site as follows:

The premise of this protection is that to reach the fuel cell or tank with some object
that would puncture or ignite the fuel, it must first pass through the
protective wrap containing fire suppressing agent. The puncturing of this
protective wrap releases a cloud of fire suppressing powder, which "inerts"
the space around the fuel cell/tank, thereby preventing the ignition of
the fuel or quickly suppressing a fire.

FIRE Panel is allegedly covered by Firetrace’s patent, 5,762,145.

Lawrence Jesclard worked at Firetrace from April 2005 through February 2006 as a Senior Program Manager and Systems Engineer.  In these positions he had access to Firetrace’s technical and business trade secrets, including customer lists.  Jesclard had a confidentiality agreement and a 6 month non-compete.

By October 2007 he had established Hazard Protection Systems, a company selling a product called NCase, which is similar to FIRE Panel.  Firetrace alleges that NCase infringes the ’145 and utilizes its trade secrets.  Firetrace also has evidence that NCase was tested in July 2006–less than 6 months after Jesclard left Firetrace–and therefore claims Jesclard breached his non-compete and confidentiality agreement.

The court initially denied Firetrace’s TRO, and has now denied further preliminary or permanent injunctive relief.  The evidence and reasoning related to the claims are all under seal or otherwise not explained in the public record.

Comments