Cicel (Beijing) Science & Technology Co., Ltd. v. Misonix, Inc.

This Court has long held that summary judgment is appropriate only in the absence of genuine issues as to any material fact, viewing the evidence in a light favorable to the opposing party. Tolan v. Cotton, 572 U.S. 650, 660 (2014) (per curium) (granting summary reversal); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). Here, however, the courts below un­ critically adopted the movant’s version of the facts and granted summary judgment based on a disputed interpretation of certain email correspondence draft­ ed by non-native English speakers—all while ignor­ ing non-movant’s witness testimony and other evi­ dence that supported an alternative reading of those emails. The questions presented are:

1. Whether the Court should summarily reverse the Second Circuit decision affirming summary judgment against Petitioner.

2. Whether the Second Circuit, after disregarding evidence in the record that favored the non­ movant, erred in adopting a “whole record” summary judgment standard that entitles the court to adopt its own disputed interpretation of email correspondence, a standard that is in conflict with the other circuits?