Page:Huk-A-Poo Sportswear v. Little Lisa.pdf/2

 Gottlieb, Rackman, Reisman & Kirsch, P. C., New York City, for plaintiff; Ellenbogen & Klein, New York City, of counsel.

Rubin, Seidman & Dochter, New York City, for defendant; Irving P. Seidman, Lawrence G. Soicher, New York City, of counsel.

TENNEY, District Judge.

Little Lisa, Ltd. (“Little Lisa”), the defendant in this copyright infringement action, has moved for an order pursuant to Rule 60(b)(5) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rules”) to dissolve the preliminary injunction issued against it on December 3, 1975, contending that “dissolution of the injunction is warranted by the drastic change that has occurred in the controlling facts upon which the injunction rested.” Affidavit of Lawrence G. Soicher, sworn to April 15, 1976, ¶ 30. Little Lisa has also moved under Rule 65(a) for an order applying the security bond posted by the plaintiff to costs and damages incurred by the defendant as a result of this allegedly wrongful injunction. Plaintiff, Huk-A-Poo Sportswear, Inc., has cross-moved for partial summary judgment under Rule 56. For the reasons set forth below, the motions of both parties are denied.

The complaint in this action was filed on November 17, 1975. On November 20, 1975 District Judge Robert J. Ward signed a temporary restraining order and scheduled November 24, 1975 as the return date for the motion for a preliminary injunction. At the November 24 hearing this Court extended the temporary restraining order upon consent and adjourned the motion for a preliminary injunction until December 3, 1975 in accordance with the request of