§Why CasetextPricing

Stormedia Texas, LLC. v. Compusa, Inc., et al

RESPONSE in Opposition re MOTION to Stay for Six Months

12 Cited authorities

  1. Landis v. North American Co.

    299 U.S. 248 (1936)   Cited 8,275 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a decision to stay proceedings "calls for the exercise of judgment, which must weigh competing interests and maintain an even balance"

  2. Viskase Corp. v. American Nat. Can Co.

    261 F.3d 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2001)   Cited 151 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Affirming a district court's decision declining to stay or reopen proceedings after judgment was entered against the defendant pending ongoing patent reexaminations that the defendant initiated post-trial

  3. Soverain Software LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc.

    356 F. Supp. 2d 660 (E.D. Tex. 2005)   Cited 130 times
    Denying stay

  4. Engel Industries, Inc., v. Lockformer Co.

    946 F.2d 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1991)   Cited 82 times
    Reversing inequitable conduct holding as unsupportable as a matter of law because reference was cumulative

  5. In re Translogic Technology

    504 F.3d 1249 (Fed. Cir. 2007)   Cited 44 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that the Supreme Court set aside the rigid application of the TSM Test and ensured use of customary knowledge as an ingredient in that equation.

  6. Edwards v. Cass County

    919 F.2d 273 (5th Cir. 1990)   Cited 61 times
    Denying immediate appeal on district court's denial of motion for qualified immunity on basis of untimeliness

  7. NTP, Inc. v. Research in Motion, Ltd.

    397 F. Supp. 2d 785 (E.D. Va. 2005)   Cited 28 times
    Denying stay on remand where a jury found infringement but the PTO had not issued first office actions against all patents at issue

  8. Anascape, Ltd. v. Microsoft Corp.

    475 F. Supp. 2d 612 (E.D. Tex. 2007)   Cited 16 times
    Granting a stay regarding patents pending in inter partes reexamination, but denying a stay to patents pending an ex parte reexamination

  9. BIAX CORPORATION v. FUJITSU COMPUTER SYSTEMS CORP

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06-CV-364 (TJW) (E.D. Tex. Feb. 26, 2007)

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06-CV-364 (TJW). February 26, 2007 MEMORANDUM ORDER T. WARD, District Judge Before the Court is Defendants Fujitsu Computer Systems Corporation and Sun Microsystems, Inc.'s Joint Motion to Stay (#19). After considering the parties' written submissions, the motion is DENIED. I. Introduction Plaintiff Biax filed suit against Defendants Fujitsu Computer Systems Corporation and Sun Microsystems, Inc. for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,517,628 ("the `628 patent"); 6,253,313 ("the

  10. Castanho v. Jackson Marine, Inc.

    484 F. Supp. 201 (E.D. Tex. 1980)   Cited 6 times

    Civ. A. No. B-79-437-CA. February 14, 1980. Robert A. Chaffin, Friedman Chaffin and Benton Musslewhite, Houston, Tex., Joe H. Tonahill, Jasper, Tex., for plaintiff. Eugene J. Silva, Vinson Elkins, Houston, Tex., for defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JOE J. FISHER, Chief Judge. The Defendants in this action, Jackson Marine, Inc., Jackson Marine, S.A., and Jackson Marine Services, N.V. have moved in this Court for an order granting a rehearing of their motion to dismiss, for a stay, and to compel

  11. Section 315 - Relation to other proceedings or actions

    35 U.S.C. § 315   Cited 535 times   879 Legal Analyses
    Permitting the Director to consolidate separate IPRs challenging the same patent

  12. Section 306 - Appeal

    35 U.S.C. § 306   Cited 42 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing that a petitioner can appeal adverse decisions to the Federal Circuit after reexaminations are complete