Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-03348/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-03348-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 1

 The PTO has since instituted IPR of the other patent-in-suit. See Docket No. 164. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CAPELLA PHOTONICS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., et al.

Defendants.

___________________________________/

No. C-14-3348 EMC

CONSOLIDATED CASES

C-14-3349 EMC

C-14-3350 EMC

C-14-3351 EMC

ORDER REGARDING CISCO’S

PENDING MOTION FOR LITIGATION

STAY PENDING INTER PARTES

REVIEW

On February 12, 2015, Cisco filed a motion to stay this action pending the Patent and

Trademark Office’s decision to institute inter partes review (IPR) of one of the patents-in-suit.1

Docket No. 161. Cisco also filed a motion to expedite the briefing schedule on its motion to stay. 

Docket No. 162, which this Court granted. Docket No. 163. Cisco’s reply in support of its motion

to stay is currently due this Friday, March 6, and a hearing is scheduled for Thursday, March 12. Id.

 In Capella’s opposition to Cisco’s motion to stay, Capella states that the non-Cisco

defendants have not taken a concrete position on whether the pending cases against them should be

stayed pending the resolution of IPR proceedings if the case against Cisco is stayed. Docket No.

167. Capella also contends that the non-Cisco defendants have not taken a firm position on

Capella’s offer to stipulate to a stay of all of the consolidated proceedings before this Court in

Case 3:14-cv-03348-EMC Document 168 Filed 03/03/15 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

exchange for the non-Cisco defendants agreeing to be bound by the outcome of Cisco’s IPR petition,

consistent with the estoppel provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2). 

Non-Cisco defendants are hereby ORDERED to file a notice before noon on Thursday,

March 5, 2015, indicating: (1) whether they seek a stay of their own cases pending resolution of

Cisco’s IPR; and (2) whether they will agree to be bound by the same estoppel that limits IPR

petitioners as set forth by 35 U.S.C. § 315(e) if the Court conditions a stay in this case on such

agreement. The notice shall not contain argument and shall not exceed one page in length. 

 IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 3, 2015

_________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:14-cv-03348-EMC Document 168 Filed 03/03/15 Page 2 of 2