Featured Posts
- Facebook Loses Reexaminations of Pragmatus’ Patents
- How is Reexamination Treating Round Rock Research?
- Reexamination has not Saved Apple against MobileMedia Patents, So Far
- What is an “Involved Application” in IPR Practice?
- Apple Victorious over Affinity Labs of Texas’ Portable Audio Player Patent
- Think IP Strategy Offers 2011 News Almanac
- An Update on Oracle’s Infringement Case against Google
- PTO Requests Public Comment on Proposed Rules for AIA Post-Issuance Proceedings
- Microsoft-i4i, Oracle-Google & VirnetX-Apple-Cisco Updates
- Oracle Patent to Emerge from Reexamination
- VirnetX again Sues for Infringement, and again Faces Reexaminations
- How Strong are Google’s Requests for Reexamination of the Lodsys Patents?
- PTO Board Sides with NVIDIA on Two Rambus “Barth I” Patents
- Oracle ‘520 Moves toward Confirmation in Reexamination
- Google Gets Mixed Result against Oracle’s Seventh Patent
- Did Google Request Reexamination of Lodsys Patents?
- Two Updates
- Oracle v. Google Android® Update
- Rambus Wins Limited Exclusion Order at ITC against NVIDIA, despite Pending Reexaminations
- 最初が肝心：不備のない再審査請求書を作成するために
- That’s My Patent You’re Reexamining…
- “Why Wait for Oppositions?” by Scott Daniels, 47 IDEA 343 (Law Review of Franklin Pierce Law School)
- The Basics
Noteworthy Links
- "The Interplay between Reexaminations, Preliminary Injunctions and Stays of Litigation" - by Dennis Crouch at PATENTLYO.COM
Favorite Patent Blogs
- All Things Pros
- CAFC Alert
- FDA Law Blog
- IPWatchdog
- Patent Docs
- Patently-O
- PLI Patent Law Practice Center
- Think IP Strategy
- US Patent Post-Grant Opposition
Recent Requests
PTO Statistics
Short Note on Stays and Lifting Stays
| December 1, 2010
On Monday we reported very favorably on Judge Padova’s decision in Cross Atlantic Capital Partners v. Facebook, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124120, to lift a reexamination stay once the examiner files an answering brief on appeal to the PTO Board.
In a slightly different context Judge Claude Milton of the Eastern District of Virginia came to a similar conclusion in 01 Communique Lab. V. Logmein, Inc., et al. 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125513: he denied the motion of the accused infringer to stay the case pending a reexamination where the examiner’s confirmation of the validity of the claims was now on appeal. Judge Milton explained that “the chances of [the] BPIA reversing the PTO are remote. Moreover, awaiting a final confirmation from the BPAI could take years.”
Thus, at least two District Court judges have come to the conclusion that a stay pending reexamination makes sense, but not a stay pending a Board appeal of a reexamination. Both judges have frankly acknowledged the conflicting factors at play and attempted to balance those factors. Of course, each case raises its own considerations.
