Willis Electric Co., Ltd. v. Polygroup Limited
- Joan Ericksen
- 0:15-cv-03443
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 5
In Willis Electric v. Polygroup, Judge Ericksen paused collection of the judgment, conditioned on a $78,626,294.74 supersedeas bond.
The Polygroup defendants received a pause in collection of the judgment but must post the required bond. Willis Electric receives security for the judgment while post-trial proceedings and any appeal continue.
What happened
In Willis Electric Co., Ltd. v. Polygroup Limited, a jury found that Polygroup willfully infringed a patent claim and awarded $42,494,772. The court later entered a $71,478,449.76 judgment, including interest.
Polygroup asked to pause collection during post-trial proceedings and a possible appeal without a bond, or with a bond equal to 10% of the judgment. Willis Electric argued that Polygroup should post the full judgment plus 10% for additional interest, costs, and delay.
Judge Ericksen granted Polygroup’s motion to pause collection, but required a $78,626,294.74 supersedeas bond— the full judgment plus 10%. The pause will continue while the bond remains in place, through the court’s decision on Polygroup’s post-trial motion and, if necessary, its appeal.
The detailed version
- Willis Electric Co., Ltd. v. Polygroup Limited · No. 0:15-cv-03443
- Joan Ericksen
- Apr. 17, 2024
Background
Willis Electric filed a patent-infringement action against Polygroup in 2015. The sole claim tried to the jury was claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 8,454,186. On January 17, 2024, the jury found that Polygroup willfully infringed that claim and awarded $42,494,772 in damages. On March 11, 2024, the Court entered judgment for $71,478,449.76, including the jury’s damages award and prejudgment interest.
The defendants seeking relief were Polygroup Limited (Macao Commercial Offshore), Polygroup Macau Limited (BVI), Polytree (H.K.) Co. Ltd., and Polygroup Trading Limited. They moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62 to stay, or pause, collection of the judgment without posting a supersedeas bond, or alternatively with a bond equal to 10% of the judgment. A supersedeas bond is security intended to protect the judgment during an appeal, including against the possibility that the judgment debtor becomes unable to pay. Willis Electric opposed the motion and requested a bond covering the full judgment plus 10% for post-judgment interest, costs, and damages for delay.
Analysis
The Court explained that courts in the District of Minnesota generally require a bond for the full judgment amount plus interest, costs, and damages for delay. A court may waive or reduce that requirement in appropriate circumstances, but the party requesting that relief must show that a departure is justified.
The Court found that Polygroup had not met that burden. Polygroup did not address the complexity of collecting the judgment. The Court stated that, because Polygroup is a foreign entity with no U.S. bank accounts, collection would likely involve significant discovery, garnishment procedures, turnover orders, and other proceedings. Polygroup also provided no information about the expected length of the appeal or its overall financial condition and ability to pay. Although Polygroup argued that the bond premium would be burdensome, its chief financial officer stated that the company could obtain a bond for the full judgment amount. Polygroup also did not identify other creditors or explain how posting the bond would harm them.
The Court acknowledged the additional difficulties Polygroup faced in obtaining a bond as a foreign entity but concluded that those difficulties did not justify waiving the bond or reducing it to 10%. The Court also found that the quoted 1.5% premium was within the normal range for supersedeas bonds.
Order
The Court granted Defendants’ motion to stay execution of the judgment, conditioned on their posting a supersedeas bond. It ordered them to post $78,626,294.74 with the Clerk of Court, representing the $71,478,449.76 judgment plus 10%. The stay will remain in effect until the Court resolves Defendants’ post-trial motion and, if necessary, during any appeal, as long as the bond remains in place.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.