Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled July 22, 2019

Rocketpower, Inc. v. Strio Consulting, Inc.

Judge
Eric Tostrud
Docket
0:19-cv-01928
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In RocketPower v. Strio, Judge Alsup denied three motions and ordered the case transferred to Minnesota.

Who this affects

RocketPower, Inc. and Strio Consulting, Inc.; the case was ordered transferred to the District of Minnesota.

What happened

RocketPower, Inc. v. Strio Consulting, Inc. concerns RocketPower’s response to an order transferring the case to the District of Minnesota. RocketPower moved to certify that transfer order for immediate appeal, requested a two-week stay, and asked the court to hear the stay motion quickly.

Strio opposed certification. The court explained that immediate review of a transfer order could be sought through a special court petition or by asking for permission to bring an early appeal under federal law. The court found that RocketPower had not met the requirements for that permission because it argued only one requirement and did not adequately explain how an appeal could affect the case’s outcome.

The court denied all three of RocketPower’s motions and directed the clerk to transfer the case to the District of Minnesota. Judge William Alsup signed the order on July 22, 2019.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Rocketpower, Inc. v. Strio Consulting, Inc. · No. 0:19-cv-01928
Judge
Eric Tostrud
Date
July 22, 2019

Background

On July 17, 2019, the court ordered the action transferred to the District of Minnesota. RocketPower then filed three motions: a motion asking the court to certify the transfer order for an interlocutory appeal, a motion seeking a two-week stay while it evaluated possible appellate relief, and a motion to shorten the time for hearing the stay motion. Strio opposed the request for certification.

Court’s analysis

The court stated that, after a federal court orders a case transferred, immediate appellate review may be sought either through a petition for a writ of mandamus or by requesting permission for an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). The court explained that § 1292(b) requires three conditions for certification and that all three must be satisfied.

The court found that none of the requirements had been met. RocketPower argued only that the case involved a controlling question of law and did not argue that the other two requirements were satisfied. The court also found that RocketPower had merely repeated the issues it wanted to appeal without explaining how resolving them on appeal could materially affect the litigation’s outcome. The court therefore concluded that RocketPower had not satisfied even one requirement for an interlocutory appeal.

Disposition

The court denied all three of RocketPower’s motions: the motion to certify the transfer order for appeal, the motion for a two-week stay, and the motion to shorten time for hearing the stay motion. It directed the clerk to transfer the action to the District of Minnesota. Judge William Alsup entered the order on July 22, 2019.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.