Border States Industries, Inc. v. Eric Nisewonger also known as Bo Nisewonger, and Gateway Electrical Supply LLC

Border States Industries · United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida · January 19, 2026 · No. 3:25cv2260-MCR-HTC

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida applies the first-filed rule to a related trade-secret misappropriation action pending in the Southern District of Alabama. The court concludes that the cases substantially overlap and directs that the Alabama action be transferred to the Northern District of Florida for consolidation. The court also grants the defendants’ request to defer consideration of the preliminary-injunction motion until consolidation.

Holdings

  1. The first-filed rule applies because the Florida and Alabama actions substantially overlap in their facts, claims, parties, asserted rights, and legal issues.
  2. Transfer of the second-filed Alabama action to the Northern District of Florida for consolidation with the first-filed Florida action was appropriate.
  3. The request to defer ruling on the preliminary-injunction motion until the related actions were consolidated was granted.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the first-filed rule applied to the Florida and Alabama actions despite differences in defendants, asserted state-law claims, and alleged downloads.
  2. Whether the Alabama action should be transferred to the Northern District of Florida and consolidated with the first-filed Florida action.
  3. Whether ruling on the preliminary-injunction motion should be deferred until the related actions were consolidated.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (7)

  • Collegiate Licensing Co. v. Am. Cas. Co. of Reading, Pa., 713 F.3d 71, 78-79 (11th Cir. 2013)(followed)
  • Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Haydu, 675 F.2d 1169, 1174 (11th Cir. 1982)(followed)
  • Cadle Co. v. Whataburger of Alice, Inc., 174 F.3d 599, 603 (5th Cir. 1999)(persuasive)
  • Manuel v. Convergys Corp., 430 F.3d 1132, 1135 (11th Cir. 2005)(followed)
  • Rickey Land & Cattle Co. v. Miller & Lux, 218 U.S. 258, 262 (1910)(persuasive)
  • Mann Mfg., Inc. v. Hortex, Inc., 439 F.2d 403, 408 (5th Cir. 1971)(persuasive)
  • Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206, 1209 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…