Reconsideration of Motion to Dismiss of Auto Parts Manufacturer Denied Due to No Manifest Error

Posted by

Defendant National Automotive Parts Association (NAPA) filed the instant Motion for Reconsideration of the order denying the Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, putting forth three arguments:

  1. The order appeared to have mistakenly cited to inadmissible and incompetent evidence
  2. The court may have overlooked a key distinction between branding or licensing a product and manufacturing or distributing a product
  3. The order did not rule on NAPA’s alternative request that an evidentiary hearing be held to resolve any factual conflict

Western District of Washington Local Civil Rule 7(h)(1) provides: “Motions for reconsideration are disfavored. The court will ordinarily deny such motions in the absence of a showing of manifest error in the prior ruling, or a showing of new facts or legal authority which could not have been brought to its attention earlier with reasonable diligence.”

The court did not find a showing of manifest error or any new facts, and subsequently denied all of NAPA’s arguments.

Read the case decision here.