Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_12-cv-04049/USCOURTS-cand-3_12-cv-04049-14/pdf.json

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

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DROPLETS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

YAHOO! INC.,

Defendant.

DROPLETS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

NORDSTROM, INC.,

Defendant.

Case Nos. 12-cv-03733-JST, 12-cv-4049-

JST

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Re: ECF No. 292, ECF No. 90

On September 13, 2013, the Court stayed these cases pending inter partes reexamination of 

U.S. Patent No. 7,502,838 (“the ’838 patent”). ECF No. 275.1 The Court has continued the stay 

several times, most recently on January 4, 2016. ECF No. 88. In the Court’s January 4, 2016 

order continuing the stay, the Court stated: “In the event that the Patent Office Appeal Board 

issues a decision prior to this date, Plaintiff is ordered to file a notice informing the Court of the 

decision within 7 days.” ECF No. 290. On April 5, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Notice Regarding 

Reexamination Appeal, notifying “the Court that an order issued in the inter partes reexamination 

appeal for U.S. Patent No. 7,502,838. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board sustained the 

Examiner’s rejection of all 38 claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,502,838.” ECF No. 292. Plaintiff also 

 

1 All ECF citations refer to the ECF docket in Droplets, Inc. v. Yahoo! Inc., No. 12-cv-3733-JST 

(filed Sept. 7, 2011).

Case 3:12-cv-04049-JST Document 91 Filed 04/12/16 Page 1 of 2
2

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

noted that it “plans to appeal the decision.” Id.

In light of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s ruling and Plaintiff’s intention to appeal 

that decision, the Court orders the parties to show cause why these cases should not remain stayed. 

Within seven days of the filing date of this order, Plaintiff shall file a response to the order to 

show cause. Defendants shall file a reply to Plaintiff’s response, if any, within seven days of the 

filing date of Plaintiff’s response. The Court will then take the matter under submission. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 12, 2016

______________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

Case 3:12-cv-04049-JST Document 91 Filed 04/12/16 Page 2 of 2