RJ CONTROL CONSULTANTS, INC.; PAUL E. ROGERS v. MULTIJECT, LLC; RSW TECHNOLOGIES, LLC; JACK ELDER - Articles

All Content

RJ CONTROL CONSULTANTS, INC.; PAUL E. ROGERS v. MULTIJECT, LLC; RSW TECHNOLOGIES, LLC; JACK ELDER

Posted by: Karen Belcher on Apr 3, 2024

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ON BRIEF: Eric Scheible, Jonathan D. Sweik, FRASCO CAPONIGRO WINEMAN SCHEIBLE HAUSER & LUTTMAN, Troy, Michigan, for Appellants.

Attorneys 2: ON BRIEF: David C. Purdue, PURDUE LAW OFFICES, LLC, Toledo, Ohio, for Appellee RSW Technologies, LLC.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Richard L. McDonnell, INTREPID LAW GROUP PLC, Rochester, Michigan, for Appellees Multiject, LLC and Jack Elder.

Judge(s): SILER, COLE, and MATHIS, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit.

MATHIS, Circuit Judge. This case involves the alleged infringement of a copyright on software code used in an industrial control system. This is the third time this case has come before us. RJ Control Consultants, Inc. and its sole shareholder, Paul Rogers (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), appeal the district court’s exclusion of their proposed expert and the grant of summary judgment to Multiject, LLC; its sole owner, Jack Elder; and RSW Technologies, LLC (collectively, “Defendants”). In the first appeal, we reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Defendants on Plaintiffs’ copyright-infringement claim related to the software code and remanded the case to the district court “for the taking of additional evidence.” RJ Control Consultants, Inc. v. Multiject, LLC, 981 F.3d 446, 458–59 (6th Cir. 2020) (RJ Control I). We dismissed the second appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction. RJ Control Consultants, Inc. v. Multiject, LLC, No. 22-1102, 2023 WL 2785764 (6th Cir. Apr. 5, 2023) (RJ Control II). Because the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding Plaintiffs’ proposed expert and because the district court did not err in granting summary judgment to Defendants, we affirm.

Attachments: