Authored by Michelle Carniaux and Julia Tanase
When a motion for a stay in view of an inter partes review (“IPR”) or covered business method review (“CBM”) is filed in a related district court litigation, the district court will grant the motion more often than it will deny it. Our study1 indicates that orders for disputed motions to stay litigation in view of IPR or CBM are granted 73.4%2 of the time.
Motions to stay pending IPR had a lower grant percentage than motions to stay pending CBM: 69.90%3 of IPR stay motions were granted as opposed to 90.48%4 of CBM stay motions. The break out of orders is as follows:
Unsurprisingly, the district courts with the most active patent dockets also have the most orders ruling upon disputed motions to stay pending IPR or CBM, (e.g., District Court of Delaware (25 decisions); Northern District of California (18 decisions) and the Eastern District of Texas (10 decisions)). The Northern District of California had the highest percentage of granted IPR stay motions: 83.33%. Meanwhile, the Eastern District of Texas had the lowest percentage of granted IPR stay motions: 50%.
A detailed list of the stay motion decisions organized by district court and judges can be found here.
1 The study excluded orders for stipulated or agreed upon motions to stay, and excluded any decisions denying motions to stay as moot, or denying reconsideration of motions to stay.
2 This percentage was determined by excluding orders denying motions to stay without prejudice.
3 This percentage was determined by excluding orders denying motions to stay without prejudice.
4 This percentage was determined by excluding orders denying motions to stay without prejudice.