Bruker Nano, Inc. v. Beijing Transcend Vivoscope Bio-Technology, Co., Ltd.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 BRUKER NANO, INC., an Arizona Case No.: 25-cv-02890-JO-BJW
corporation,
Plaintiff, MINUTE ORDER DENYING EX
PARTE APPLICATION FOR
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING
v. ORDER BEIJING TRANSCEND VIVOSCOPE BIO-TECHNOLOGY, CO., LTD., a Chinese limited company, Defendant.
On November 4, 2025, Plaintiff microscope manufacturer, who holds the trademark “nVista,” filed a motion for an ex parte temporary restraining order (TRO) to enjoin Defendant microscope manufacturer from using the term “TRANSVISTA” in connection with the advertising and sale of digital microscopes, particularly at next week’s conference in San Diego starting November 15, 2025. Dkt. 5 (“TRO Mot.”). Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b), to obtain a TRO, a plaintiff must establish that (1) they are likely to succeed on the merits; (2) they are likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief; (3) the balance of equities tips in…