English
Is the Mere Existence of a Newly Filed Inter Partes Reexamination Request Enough to Stay a District Court Litigation?
Many district courts have complained that the length of inter partes reexamination proceedings is a significant deterrent to granting a stay of patent litigation. Consequently, district courts typically deny a stay request where there is a newly filed inter partes reexamination request that could result in an indefinite delay in court action prejudicial to a Patent Owner. The Northern District of California however, appears to have deviated from this approach.
In Advanced Analogic Technologies, Inc. (“AATI”) v. Kinetic Technolgies, Inc. (“KTI”) (Case No. 09-CV-01360), Judge Maxine Chesney of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted an indefinite stay of a patent infringement suit pending the outcome of inter partes reexamination of AATI’s semiconductor patent-in-suit. The patent-in-suit is U.S. Patent No. 7,127,631 entitled “Single Wire Serial Interface Utilizing Count of Encoded Clock Pulses with Reset.” Both AATI and KTI make semiconductors used in computers, cameras and smart phones that employ integrated circuits with light-emitting driver circuits.
Interestingly, the stay was granted despite the fact that the USPTO has not even reviewed KTI’s inter partes reexamination request . A trial date had been set for March 2011 and significant discovery had been completed.
In the order staying the litigation Judge Chesney indicated that the stay would allow narrowing and clarifying claim construction via the reexamination proceedings. However, both parties agreed, that when accounting for appeals at the USPTO, the inter partes reexamination proceedings could take seven to eight years to conclude.
The parties are required to file annual joint status reports on the progress of the inter partes reexamination proceedings.
[...] Texas, stays are not as commonly granted for patent reexaminations, certainly not to the extent of some of the more extreme districts. As such, it appears as though the defendants, Microsoft included, chose to follow a more [...]
[...] recent posts, we have discussed the Northern District of California’s surprising stay of a patent infringement suit in view of an undecided reexamination request. Likewise, our [...]