Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction restraining defendant from interfering with plaintiffs' rights as owners of a patent for an infrared radiation apparatus for de-icing aircraft. Plaintiffs sufficiently established a likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm if injunctive relief is not granted and a balancing of the equities in their favor ( see, Aetna Ins. Co. v Capasso, 75 N.Y.2d 860, 862; Grant Co. v Srogi, 52 N.Y.2d 496, 517; Town of Porter v Chem-Trol Pollution Servs., 60 A.D.2d 987, 988).
At this stage, we reject defendant's contention that plaintiffs cannot succeed on the merits. Defendant contends that, as officers of defendant corporation, plaintiffs Chew and Seel owed a fiduciary duty not to divert a corporate opportunity from defendant and an obligation to assign all rights to inventions and patents to the corporation ( see, Grip Nut Co. v Sharp, 150 F.2d 192, cert denied 326 U.S. 742; Kennedy v Wright, 676 F. Supp. 888, affd 867 F.2d 616; Great Lakes Press Corp. v Froom, 695 F. Supp. 1440). New York has not adopted the rule announced in those cases ( see, Cahill v Regan, 5 N.Y.2d 292), and, in any event, defendant failed to show that Chew or Seel had sufficient control over the management of the corporation or exercised the power of a president or chief executive officer to come within that rule.