Residential Energy Services Network, Inc. v. Building Science Institute, Ltd. Co., et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of California denied Building Science Institute’s motion for reconsideration of a preliminary injunction concerning the use of “HERS” in connection with home energy ratings. The court held that the proffered evidence was not newly discovered, that subsequent legal authorities did not constitute an intervening change in controlling law, and that the defendant had not shown clear error regarding the treatment of a settlement agreement.

Holdings

1. Reconsideration was unwarranted because the evidence existed before the preliminary-injunction hearing and Building Science Institute failed to show that it could not have discovered and presented the evidence through reasonable diligence.
2. No intervening change in controlling law required reconsideration. Great Concepts made the challenge to the trademark more demanding, OpenAI was not binding and did not address the specific issue presented, and Heritage Alliance merely recognized discretion already reflected in the statute and existing case law.
3. The court did not commit clear error. Even if describing the California Energy Commission settlement agreement as “akin to a license” was imprecise, the court understood the agreement's essential facts and terms, so its prior ruling was not clearly erroneous.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Building Science Institute presented newly discovered evidence warranting reconsideration of the preliminary injunction.
2. Whether intervening legal authority required reconsideration of the preliminary injunction's likelihood-of-success analysis.
3. Whether the court committed clear error by treating the California Energy Commission settlement agreement as akin to a license agreement.
4. Whether the unopposed motion for judicial notice should be granted.

Disposition

other