In an oral order yesterday, Judge Andrews gave some helpful guidance on IPR stays and conserving judicial resources.
In Interactive Games LLC v. DraftKings, Inc., C.A. No. 19-1105-RGA (D. Del.), the parties filed a status report on whether a 90-day stay of the case should remain in place pending resolution of several pending IPR petitions.
Plaintiff wanted the whole case to remain stayed; the defendant wanted keep the stay in place until their § 101 motion can "be heard in-person and a decision ... rendered and then, thereafter, [the stay should be renewed] during the pendency of the IPRs." (D.I. 24.)
Or, as Judge Andrews put it, the defendant wanted "to stay the case except for when the Court is working on it." (D.I. 25.)
Because "the Court is just as interested in conserving its resources as the parties are theirs," Judge Andrews stayed the entire case pending resolution of the IPR. On top of that, he "dismissed" the § 101 motion with leave to refile with updated briefing after the stay.
If you enjoyed this post, consider subscribing to receive free e-mail updates about new posts.
