Intersil Corporation et al v. Technology Licensing Corporation et al

Filing 50

ORDER RE: 42 DENYING MOTION TO STAY, WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 02/11/2010. (rslc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/11/2010).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

**E-filed 02/11/2010**

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

INTERSIL CORPORATION, et al., v. Plaintiffs,

No. C 09-02386 RS ORDER RE STAY MOTIONS

TECHNOLOGY LICENSING CORPORATION, et al., Defendants. ____________________________________/

Plaintiffs seek to stay this entire case pending resolution of the action pending in Santa Clara Superior Court between them and defendants. Third party defendant Ross Video joins in that motion and further seeks a stay of the claims against it until the claims between plaintiffs and defendants are resolved. As discussed at the hearing, granting a formal stay in either instance does not appear to be warranted at this juncture, but efficient use of Court and party resources does call for appropriate consideration of some of the issues raised in the motions with respect to scheduling how this case is to proceed. Accordingly, the motions will be denied without prejudice, and the parties are directed to meet and confer to attempt to reach agreements on phasing discovery and/or other proceedings in this action, as well as coordinating discovery with that occurring in the state court action. The

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

parties shall present their proposals in conjunction with the upcoming Case Management Conference.

Dated: 02/11/2010 RICHARD SEEBORG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

2