Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-01507/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-01507-6/pdf.json

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SILICONIX INCORPORATED, a Delaware

corporation

Plaintiff,

 v.

DENSO CORPORATION, a Japanese

corporation, and TD SCAN (U.S.A.), INC., a

Michigan corporation

Defendants. /

No. C 05-01507 WHA

ORDER DENYING 

MOTION FOR STAY AND

VACATING HEARING

In this patent case, defendants now move for an order staying all proceedings pending

reexamination of United States Patent Nos. 4,767,722 and 4,967,245. Because infringement of

those two patents is not alleged in this action, defendants’ motion is DENIED.

In Siliconix Inc. v. Advanced Analogic Techs., Inc., Civil Action No. C 04-00344, the

defendant filed requests for reexamination of the three patents-in-suit. The United States Patent

and Trademark Office granted reexamination of the ’722 patent and the ’245 patent, but denied

the request with respect to United States Patent No. 5,034,785. Judge Susan Illston granted a

stay on November 4, 2004. Defendants argue that if a stay is not granted, it would defeat the

purpose of finding Civil Action Nos. C 04-00344, C 05-01507 and C 05-03617 related.

The Court has broad discretion in deciding whether to grant or deny a motion to stay

proceedings pending reexamination. ASCII Corp. v. STD Entm’t USA, Inc., 844 F. Supp. 1378,

1380 (N.D. Cal. 1994). Plaintiff in this action only alleges infringement of the ’785 patent, for

Case 3:05-cv-01507-WHA Document 48 Filed 11/15/05 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

which there is no reexamination pending. While it is true that both the ’722 patent and the ’785

patent concern planar vertical channel DMOS structures, the risk that reexamination of the

method claims of the former will have a substantial impact on the apparatus claims of the latter

appears to be slight. As such, no stay will be entered, at least not yet. If circumstances change,

the Court may reconsider whether a stay is warranted. The Court may also consider deferring

any claim construction rulings until after the reexamination proceedings are completed, if

supplemental briefing seems necessary.

Finally, defendants should rest assured that the related Siliconix actions will not proceed

on three separate tracks. Pretrial proceedings will be coordinated at least in C 05-01507 and

C 05-03617, if not in all three actions. Any further concerns in this regard should be raised at

the case management conference on DECEMBER 15, 2005 AT 11:00 A.M. The hearing on this

motion, currently scheduled for DECEMBER 15, 2005 AT 8:00 A.M., is VACATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 15, 2005 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-01507-WHA Document 48 Filed 11/15/05 Page 2 of 2