Cybergun S.A. v. Jag Precision, Inc.

MEMORANDUM

Defendant Jag Precision appeals the district court’s order granting plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction barring Jag from “making, using, selling, and offering to sell” airsoft guns that replicate the designs of firearms made and designed by plaintiff FN Herstal (FNH). The plaintiffs, Cybergun and FNH, brought this action claiming that the designs of the firearms in question — the M249, M249 PARA, and P90 — are protected trade dress under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125 .

“A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.” Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 , 129 S.Ct. 365 , 172 L.Ed.2d 249 (2008).

“We review the grant or denial of a preliminary injunction for abuse of discretion. Our review is limited and deferential, and [w]e do not review the underlying merits of the case.” Am. Trucking Ass’ns v. City of Los Angeles, 559 F.3d 1046, 1052 (9th Cir.2009) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)…