Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_12-cv-03865/USCOURTS-cand-3_12-cv-03865-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:145 Patent Infringement

---

1

Case No. 3:12-cv-03865-VC

ORDER GRANTING STAY

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

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION

TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES LIMITED LLC,

et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD., et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 3:12-cv-03865-VC

ORDER GRANTING STAY

Plaintiffs ask the court to stay all deadlines and proceedings in this case1other than the 

deadline for Plaintiffs to seek relief and file objections to the undersigned’s Claim Construction 

Report and Recommendation.2 In light of that report, Plaintiffs offered Defendants in this and the 

related actions3a stipulation to a judgment of non-infringement should Judge Chhabria adopt the 

recommended construction of “an entire oscillator disposed upon said integrated circuit substrate”

in U.S. Patent 5,809,336.4 

 

1

See Docket No. 100.

2

See Docket No. 98.

3

See Technology Properties Limited, LLC et al. v. ZTE Corporation et al., Case No. 3:12-cv03876-VC; Technology Properties Limited LLC et al.v. Nintendo Co., Ltd et al., Case No. 3:12-cv03881-VC; Technology Properties Limited LLC et al.v. LG Electroncis, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:12-

cv-03880-VC; Technology Properties Limited LLC et al.v. Samsung Electronic Co., LTD et al.,

Case No. 3:12-cv-03877-VC.

4

See Docket No. 100 at 1.

Case 3:12-cv-03865-VC Document 104 Filed 10/02/15 Page 1 of 2
2

Case No. 3:12-cv-03865-VC

ORDER GRANTING STAY

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

For the Northern District of California

The other Defendants accepted the offer and agreed to stay;5 Defendants here declined.6 

They say they have a right to pursue their claim that the ’336 patent is invalid, and that a stay 

would unfairly delay their right to a ruling.7 

With full appreciation of Defendants’ interest in finally getting a resolution of a dispute 

between the parties that began in 2006, on balance a stay is warranted. With the related cases 

stayed, there is little or no reason to proceed here in a piecemeal fashion. As the court explained 

before, the primary goal of the referral to the undersigned is give the presiding judge a single 

package of items for final resolution if necessary. That goal is undermined by anything less than a 

complete stay. 

Plaintiffs’ motion is GRANTED.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 2, 2015

_________________________________

PAUL S. GREWAL

United States Magistrate Judge

 

5

See Technology Properties Limited, LLC et al. v. ZTE Corporation et al., Case No. 3:12-cv03876-VC at Docket No. 111; Technology Properties Limited LLC et al.v. Nintendo Co., Ltd et al.,

Case No. 3:12-cv-03881-VC at Docket No. 108; Technology Properties Limited LLC et al.v. LG 

Electroncis, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:12-cv-03880-VC at Docket No. 119; Technology Properties 

Limited LLC et al.v. Samsung Electronic Co., LTD et al., Case No. 3:12-cv-03877-VC at Docket 

No. 106.

6

See Docket No. 100 at 1.

7

See Docket No. 103 at 1.

Case 3:12-cv-03865-VC Document 104 Filed 10/02/15 Page 2 of 2