Tric Tools, Inc. v. TT Technologies, Inc et al
Filing
52
ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DENYING RENEWED MOTION FOR STAY by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granting 39 Motion (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/6/2012)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
TRIC TOOLS, INC.,
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
10
Plaintiff,
12
13
14
15
16
vs.
Case No.: 12-CV-3490 YGR
ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR
RECONSIDERATION AND DENYING
RENEWED MOTION FOR STAY
TT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND TRACTOTECHNIK GMBH & CO., KG, et al.,
Defendants.
Defendant TT Technologies, Inc. (“TT”) filed its Motion for Leave to File Motion for
17
Reconsideration on October 26, 2012. (Dkt. No. 39.) The Court set a briefing schedule and the
18
parties submitted additional briefing, which the Court has now considered. The parties were also
19
permitted to make brief arguments on the motion at the previously scheduled case management
20
21
22
conference on December 3, 2012.
The request for reconsideration is GRANTED. The Court finds its Order of October 25, 2012
23
Denying Motion to Stay Litigation Pending Patent Reexamination (Dkt No. 38) appropriate for
24
reconsideration in light of new facts occurring after the time of its Order, namely that the United
25
States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) granted all four of its petitions for reexamination of the
26
27
28
patents at issue.
1
However, the motion for stay is DENIED. The Court does not find those additional facts
2
sufficient to warrant granting a stay under the circumstances here. It is not certain that the PTO’s
3
reexamination will limit or simplify the issues before the Court in this action. Defendant TT would
4
still be free to raise all the same invalidity contentions here once the reexamination was concluded.
5
See AT&T Intellectual Prop. I v. Tivo, Inc., 774 F. Supp. 2d 1049, 1053 (N.D. Cal. 2011). Moreover,
6
7
the evidence indicates that a stay, and delay in resolution of the litigation could result in undue
8
prejudice to Plaintiff Tric Tools. See Telemac Corp. v. Teledigital, Inc., 450 F.Supp.2d 1107, 1111
9
(N.D.Cal. 2006).
10
IT IS SO ORDERED.
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
Date: _December 6, 2012
_______________________________________
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?