Stay Motion Late In Litigation Is Denied

Morris James LLP
Contact

Greatbatch Ltd. v. AVX Corporation, et al., C.A. No. 13-723-LPS, December 10, 2015.

Stark, C. J.  Defendants’ motion to stay  pending IPR and reissue proceedings is denied.

The PTAB did not institute IPR with respect to the sole claim asserted in this case with respect to one of the asserted patents. Defendants filed their motion on the last day permitted by statute, and delayed moving for a stay until after completion of discovery, briefing for summary judgment and less than two months before the pre-trial conference.  The PTAB’s decision did not address the disputed claim and any further guidance on appeal is wholly speculative.  The court has ruled on claim construction and a multitude of motions.  This factor likewise weighs against a stay. The vast amount of resources already expended weighs in favor of proceeding to trial on all remaining patents-in-suit.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Morris James LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Morris James LLP
Contact
more
less

Morris James LLP on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide