FCX Solar, LLC v. FTC Solar, Inc.

Filing 50

ORDER granting (49) Letter Motion to Consolidate Cases 1:21-cv-3556 (as Lead Case) with 1:21-cv-8766 in case 1:21-cv-03556-RA-DCF. Application granted. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to consolidate 21-cv-3556 and 21-cv-8766 under the master file of 21-cv-3556. (Signed by Judge Ronnie Abrams on 11/19/2021) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-03556-RA-DCF, 1:21-cv-08766-RA (ate)

Download PDF
November 18, 2021 Matthew J. Moffa MMoffa@perkinscoie.com D. + F. +1.212.399.8057 VIA ECF Hon. Ronnie Abrams, USDJ United States District Court Southern District of New York 40 Foley Square Room 2203 New York, NY 10007 Re: FCX Solar, LLC v. FTC Solar, Inc., Case No. 1:21-CV-03556-RA Dear Judge Abrams: The parties in the above-captioned matter (the “License Action”) submit this joint letter motion requesting that this case be consolidated for all purposes, including trial, with FTC Solar, LLC v. FTC Solar, Inc., 1:21-CV-08766-RA (the “Patent Action”) pursuant to Rule 42(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Complaint in the License Action was filed on April 21, 2021. It asserts contract and tort claims arising out of FTC’s alleged breach of a patent license agreement between the parties. FTC provided notice of termination of the license agreement by letter dated April 30, 2021. In the Patent Action, FCX alleges that FTC continued to offer, sell, and encourage use of products infringing one of FCX’s patents after the termination of the license. FTC disputes that it breached the license agreement or that it sells or sold products that infringe FCX’s patents. FCX filed the Patent Action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas on May 29, 2021. FTC’s Motion to Transfer the action was granted on October 25, 2021, and the case was transferred to this district and assigned to Judge Crotty. (No. 21-cv-548-ADA, ECF No. 30.) FCX filed Related Case Statements in both the License Action and the Patent Action on October 29, 2021. (No. 21-cv-3556-RA, ECF No. 41; No. 21-cv-8766-RA, ECF No. 32.) Your Honor accepted transfer of the Patent Action on November 9, 2021. The parties jointly request (and grant their express consent) that the License Action and the Patent Action be consolidated pursuant to Rule 42(a). See, e.g., Szymczak v. Nissan N. Am., Inc., 2012 WL 1877306, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. May 15, 2012) (consolidating actions “[o]n the consent of all parties”). “[A]s long as there will be a fair and impartial trial,” a district court should exercise its discretion to “consolidate actions for trial where there are common questions of law or fact to avoid unnecessary costs or delay.” Garnett-Bishop v. N.Y. Cmty. Bancorp, Inc., 299 F.R.D. 1, 5 Hon. Ronnie Abrams November 18, 2021 Page 2 (E.D.N.Y. 2014). The License Action and the Patent Action raise common questions of law and fact regarding the relationship between FCX’s intellectual property and certain aspects of FTC’s solar tracker products. Consolidating the actions will reduce the burden on the parties and the Court from overlapping discovery, expedite trial, and enhance judicial economy. Devlin v. Transp. Commc’ns Int’l Union, 175 F.3d 121, 130 (2d Cir. 1999). The parties respectfully request that this letter motion be granted. Should the Court grant this motion, the parties will provide a proposed common scheduling order for the consolidated cases within one week of the Court’s order. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Matthew J. Moffa Matthew J. Moffa cc: All counsel of record (via ECF) Application granted. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to consolidate 21-cv-3556 and 21-cv-8766 under the master file of 21-cv-3556. SO ORDERED. ___________________ Hon. Ronnie Abrams 11/19/2021

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?