The Western District of Texas granted a motion to stay a patent infringement lawsuit pending inter partes review not only because doing so would simplify the issues in the still-early litigation and reduce the burden on the...more
This post reviews developments from the Northern, Southern, Eastern, and Western Districts of Texas in December 2023. ...more
The Western District of Texas recently denied a defendant’s motion to stay pending inter partes review based in part on the defendant’s status as a non-party in the IPR proceedings. In doing so, the district court focused on...more
We are excited to announce Venable’s inaugural Life Sciences Webinar Series. This month-long series will explore the intricacies and latest developments that shape the life sciences industry. Join us as we hear from our...more
Congress implemented the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”) to “establish a more efficient and streamlined patent system that [would] improve patent quality and limit unnecessary and counterproductive litigation costs.” ...more
This post reviews three July 2022 opinions from the Western and Eastern Districts of Texas resolving motions to stay. The first case involves the denial of a stay pending reexamination proceedings issued by the...more
On April 6, 2022, U.S. Magistrate Judge James M. Wicks (E.D.N.Y.) granted Defendant Cartessa Aesthetics, LLC’s (“Cartessa”) motion to stay the litigation pending the resolution of IPRs filed against each of the five asserted...more
On January 19, 2021, United States District Judge Edgardo Ramos (S.D.N.Y.) denied Kannuu Pty Ltd. (“Kannuu”)’s motion for preliminary injunction and instead granted Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (“Samsung”)’s motion to stay...more
The PTAB has explained that it has discretion to deny an IPR petition even if the petitioner has shown that it meets the statutory threshold for institution, which requires “that there is a reasonable likelihood that the...more
Key Takeaways - On March 31, 2020, PTO Director Andrei Iancu ordered the PTAB to grant any requests for extensions for pre-institution briefing schedules for any COVID-19-related delays. - Significantly, the March 31...more
This post analyzes three March 2020 opinions from the Eastern District of Texas deciding motions to stay pending: (1) an IPR filed by a third party; (2) a declaratory judgment action pursuant to the customer-suit exception;...more
Defendants sued for patent infringement in district court commonly seek litigation stays based on an American Invents Act (AIA)-contested proceeding that assesses the validity of the patents-in-suit before the Patent Trial...more
White & Case Technology Newsflash - This update briefly summarizes 2019 trends in patent litigation from the Northern District of California, which remains an important and frequent venue for technology litigation....more
Powerful. Resilient. Ever-evolving. These characteristics of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) were on full display in 2019. This past year the PTAB received more than 1,300 inter partes review (IPR), post grant review...more
Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the Eastern District of Texas issued a decision addressing motions to stay a patent infringement case under the “customer-suit exception” to the general first-to-file rule. Judge Gilstrap...more
Last month, in Becon Medical, Ltd. v. Bartlett, Senior District Judge Jan E. Dubois of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied a motion to stay filed by Defendants Scott P. Bartlett, M.D. and...more
After SAS, does institution of an IPR make a district court more or less likely to stay a parallel litigation? Maybe, maybe not. In its April 2018 decision in SAS Institute v. Iancu, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the...more
The United States District Court for the Central District of California recently denied Defendant Adobe Systems Inc.’s motion to stay litigation pending resolution of parallel inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings before...more
In a recent order, the ITC denied a motion to stay after ALJ Bullock found that the balance of the Semiconductor Chips factors weighed against granting the motion. See In re Certain Memory Modules And Components Thereof, Inv....more
By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Maryellen Noreika in Agrofresh Inc. v. Essentiv LLC et al., Civil Action No. 16-662-MN (D.Del. May 31, 2019), the Court granted the motion to stay of defendants pending resolution...more
In a non-precedential opinion, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s grant of preliminary injunction requiring a licensee to withdraw its inter partes review (IPR) and post grant review...more
In 3G Licensing, S.A. et al v. HTC Corporation, the Honorable Christopher J. Burke of the District of Delaware denied Defendants’ motion for partial stay pending resolution of inter partes review (IPR) because of the lack of...more
District courts have discretionary authority to grant a motion to stay. Courts consider three factors in deciding how to exercise that discretion, the first being whether a stay will simplify the issues for trial. In...more
When faced with allegations of patent infringement at the International Trade Commission (ITC), a respondent must quickly evaluate whether or not to request an AIA review (hereinafter, inter partes review for convenience) at...more
Following up on our previous coverage of Immunex’s patent infringement suit against Sanofi related to Immunex’s Dupixent® (dupilumab) biologic, Judge Otero recently denied Sanofi’s motion for summary judgement of invalidity...more