Market-Alerts Pty. Ltd. v. Bloomberg Finance L.P., et al., C.A. Nos. 12-780-GMS, 12-781-GMS, 12-782-GMS, 12-783-GMS, 12-784-GMS, and 12-785-GMS, February 5, 2013
Sleet, J. Defendants’ motion to stay is granted.
On November 9, 2012, some defendants moved to stay litigation pending post-grant review pursuant to Section 18(b) of the AIA. The motion was granted. The statutory test for determining whether to grant a stay under Section 18(b)(1) closely resembles the stay analysis courts have applied in assessing a motion to stay ending inter partes or ex parte reexamination. Here, the four statutory factors – (1) issues simplification, (2) stage of litigation, (3) undue prejudice, and (4) burden of litigation – weigh in favor of granting the requested stay. Despite the fact that issues will remain after the administrative process is complete the court believes there is at least a reasonable chance some or all claims will be invalidated or amended which would simplify the litigation. This litigation is at its earliest stage with no schedules set, no substantive motions filed and no substantive rulings. The timing of the motion does not suggest dilatory motive and there is no evidence that plaintiff directly competes with defendants’ products. Related cases are also stayed in an exercise of the court’s discretion in order to alleviate plaintiff’s concern that it would be less efficient because it would still be litigating against the non-moving defendants.