Russel Williams Home Services LLC v. Minleon International (USA) Limited LLC, Minleon Group Ltd, and Holiday Lighting Management, LLC

Russel Williams Home Services · United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania · December 17, 2025 · No. 1:25-cv-1665

Summary

The United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania denied Russel Williams Home Services LLC’s motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. The court ordered attorneys Joshua L. Schwartz and Justin A. Tomevi to show cause why they should not be sanctioned under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 after allegedly submitting nonexistent quotations from cited Federal Circuit decisions.

Court
United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Writing for the Court
Keli M. Neary
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Decision date
December 17, 2025
Docket number
1:25-cv-1665
Procedural posture
Plaintiff moved for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. The district court denied the motion and ordered two plaintiff's attorneys to show cause concerning allegedly nonexistent quotations in a brief and potential sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11.
Precedential value
Unpublished district court order with no reporter citation; precedential status is not stated in the document.
Parties
Russel Williams Home Services LLC v. Minleon International (USA) Limited LLC, Minleon Group Ltd, Holiday Lighting Management, LLC
Disposition
other

Topics

injunctionssanctionscivil procedurecommercial litigation

Practice areas

Civil procedureCommercial litigationRemediesLegal ethics and attorney sanctions

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction should be granted.
  2. Whether Attorneys Joshua L. Schwartz and Justin A. Tomevi should be required to show cause concerning allegedly nonexistent quotations in their brief and potential sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11.

Factual background

The plaintiff sought a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against the defendants. The order identifies allegedly nonexistent quotations to two Federal Circuit cases in a brief filed by Attorneys Joshua L. Schwartz and Justin A. Tomevi. The order does not state the underlying substantive facts or the court's reasons for denying injunctive relief; it refers to an accompanying memorandum that is not included in the document text.

Procedural history

The plaintiff filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, supported by a brief. After considering the parties' briefs, the court denied the requested emergency and preliminary injunctive relief. The court separately ordered Attorneys Joshua L. Schwartz and Justin A. Tomevi to show cause regarding quotations attributed to two Federal Circuit decisions and possible Rule 11 sanctions.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…