LIPPERT COMPONENTS MFG. v. MOR/RYDE INTERNATIONAL INC. , No. 19-2121 (Fed. Cir. 2020)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 19-2121 Document: 38 Page: 1 Filed: 06/08/2020 NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ LIPPERT COMPONENTS MANUFACTURING, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee v. RYAN MATTHEW FOUNTAIN, Sanctioned Party-Appellant v. MOR/RYDE INTERNATIONAL INC., MOR/RYDE INC., Defendants-Appellees ______________________ 2019-2121 ______________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana in No. 3:14-cv-01999-JDMGG, Judge Jon DeGuilio. ______________________ Decided: June 8, 2020 ______________________ JONATHAN FROEMEL, Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Chicago, IL, argued for plaintiff-appellee. Also represented by ELIZABETH A. PETERS. Case: 19-2121 Document: 38 LIPPERT COMPONENTS MFG. 2 se. Page: 2 Filed: 06/08/2020 v. MOR/RYDE INTERNATIONAL INC. RYAN MATTHEW FOUNTAIN, Mishawaka, IN, argued pro JOSEPH ALBERT SALTIEL, Marshall, Gerstein & Borun LLP, Chicago, IL, argued for defendants-appellees. ______________________ Before PROST, Chief Judge, REYNA and TARANTO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. The United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana sanctioned Ryan M. Fountain under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 and struck some of his filings from the record. See Lippert Components Mfg., Inc. v. Mor/Ryde Int’l Inc., No. 3:14-cv-1999, ECF No. 90 (N.D. Ind. May 20, 2016); id., ECF No. 145 (N.D. Ind. Feb. 23, 2017); id., ECF No. 161 (N.D. Ind. Aug. 10, 2017). Mr. Fountain appeals these actions. Because we determine that the district court’s 28 U.S.C. § 1927 sanction award was not based upon clear errors of fact and was not an abuse of discretion, we affirm the award. We further determine that we lack jurisdiction to review the district court’s striking of the filings from the record, which does not constitute a sanction of Mr. Fountain. Accordingly, insofar as this appeal challenges the district court’s striking of filings from the record, we dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. AFFIRMED-IN-PART AND DISMISSED-IN-PART

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.