Classic Concepts, Inc. v. Linen Source, Inc.

Opinion by Judge ZOUHARY; Concurrence by Judge REINHARDT.

OPINION

This copyright lawsuit arose when Plaintiff-Appellant Classic Concepts, Inc. (“Classic”) filed complaints against Defendants-Appellees Hellenic Rug Imports, Inc. (“Hellenic”) and Linen Source, Inc. (“Linen Source”) (collectively, “Defendants”), alleging Defendants infringed Classic’s “diamond kilim” design by selling rugs and other home goods bearing the design. In August 2007, after a ten-day trial, a jury found that Hellenic and Linen Source infringed Classic’s copyright of the diamond kilim design and awarded Classic damages of $15,443 against Hellenic and $878 against Linen Source.

The district court invited input on what to include in a final judgment, and both parties briefed whether injunctive relief was appropriate. On September 28, 2007, the district court entered Judgment awarding damages against Hellenic and Linen Source, and sub silentio denying injunctive relief, as follows:

On October 5, 2007, Defendants timely filed a renewed motion for Judgment as a matter of law under Federal Civil Rule 50(b), as well as a timely motion for a new trial under Rule 59. The district court denied both motions on…

concurring.

I concur in the result.

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CLASSIC CONCEPTS, INC., a No. 07-56870 New Mexico Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:04-cv-08088- v. GPS-MAN

LINEN SOURCE, INC., a Florida OPINION Corporation; HELLENIC RUG IMPORTS, INC., a New York Corporation, Defendants-Appellees.

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California George P. Schiavelli, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 11, 2013* Pasadena, California

Filed May 30, 2013

* The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 2 CLASSIC CONCEPTS, INC. V. LINEN SOURCE, INC.

Before: Stephen Reinhardt and Mary H. Murguia, Circuit Judges, and Jack Zouhary, District Judge.**

Opinion by Judge Zouhary; Concurrence by Judge Reinhardt

SUMMARY***

Appellate Jurisdiction

Dismissing a civil appeal as untimely, the panel held that an untimely motion for reconsideration under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) did not toll the time for filing a notice of appeal.

Judge Reinhardt concurred in the…