Evolutionary Intelligence, LLC v. Yelp, Inc.

Filing 127

ORDER CONFIRMING STAY. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 10/17/2014. (rmwlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/17/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
SAN JOSE DIVISION

11
12

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,

13

Case Nos. C-13-04513, C-13-04201, C-13-04202,
C-13-04203, C-13-04204, C-13-04205, C-1304206, C-13-04207, C-13-03587

Plaintiff,
ORDER CONFIRMING STAY

14

v.

15

SPRINT NEXTEL CORPORATION,
SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS
COMPANY L.P., SPRINT SPECTRUM
L.P., SPRINT SOLUTIONS INC.,

16
17

Defendants.

18
19
20

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,
Plaintiff,

21
22
23
24

v.
APPLE, INC.,
Defendants.

25
26
27
28
ORDER CONFIRMING STAY
EDB

-1-

1
2

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,
Plaintiff,

3
4
5

v.
FACEBOOK, INC.,
Defendants.

6
7
8

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,
Plaintiff,

9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

v.

11

FOURSQUARE LABS, INC.,

12

Defendants.

13
14

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,

15

Plaintiff,

16

v.

17

GROUPON, INC.,

18

Defendants.

19
20

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,

21
22
23
24

Plaintiff,
v.
LIVINGSOCIAL, INC.,
Defendants.

25
26
27
28
ORDER CONFIRMING STAY
EDB

-2-

1
2

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,
Plaintiff,

3
4
5

v.
TWITTER, INC.,
Defendants.

6
7
8

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,
Plaintiff,

9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

v.

11

YELP, INC.,
Defendants.

12
13
14

EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE,
LLC,

15

Plaintiff,

16

v.

17

MILLENNIAL MEDIA, INC.,

18

Defendants.

19
20
21

On September 26, 2014 the court conditionally granted defendants’ motion to maintain the

22

stay in the above-captioned cases. Dkt. No. 174. As a condition of its order granting defendants’

23

motion, the court ordered defendants not participating in the ongoing inter partes review (“IPR”) of

24

the patents at suit to file a written commitment no later than October 7, 2014 agreeing to the

25

following limited estoppel:

26
27
28

[the non-participating party] will not assert the invalidity of any claim on
any ground raised in the IPR and on which a final written decision is
rendered under 35 U.S.C. § 318(a). Any dispute as to what is meant by
“final written decision” or “any ground raised” will be resolved by the
court.
ORDER CONFIRMING STAY
EDB

-3-

1

Dkt. No. 174 at 14. 1

2

Each non-participating defendant subsequently filed notice of their agreement to the above

3

terms. See Dkt. Nos. 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 181. Accordingly, the court hereby confirms that the

4

related cases are stayed until final written decision in the pending IPR, the date by which a final

5

decision is now due, or further order of the court, whichever occurs first. Dkt. No. 174, at 13–14.

6
7

Within one week of the written final decision in the IPR, the parties shall file a joint status
report informing the court as to the outcome of the IPR.

8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

Dated: October 17, 2014

_________________________________
RONALD M. WHYTE
United States District Judge

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

The statutory estoppel of 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) applies to IPR participants Apple, Yelp, and
Twitter.
ORDER CONFIRMING STAY
EDB

-4-