Defendants often move to stay a litigation pending final review of an Inter Partes Review challenge. Defendants typically argue that a stay would avoid different invalidity rulings from the PTAB and district court. Plaintiffs often counter that a stay would unduly prejudice the plaintiff as delaying the case further. It should be no surprise, then, that a stay was denied when a defendant filed its IPR petitions on literally the last day allowable under statute.
In the case of Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture, LLC v. HTC Corp. (Case No. 2:14-cv-00690, E.D. Tex. June 16, 2016), HTC moved for a stay at the end of the one year statutory term for filing an IPR. That is, defendants may petition for IPR within one year of being served with a complaint of patent infringement. Parthenon filed their lawsuit on June 12, 2014, and served HTC on June 24, 2014. Literally one year to the day after service, HTC filed their IPR petitions and subsequently moved the court to stay the case.
