Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-01567/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-01567-0/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

MICROSOFT CORPORATION, a Washington

corporation,

Plaintiff,

 v.

COMPRESSION LABS INC., a Delaware

corporation, and FORGENT NETWORKS,

INC., a Delaware corporation,

Defendants. /

No. C 05-01567 WHA

ORDER GRANTING

TEMPORARY STAY AND

VACATING HEARINGS

INTRODUCTION

In this patent case, plaintiff Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”) seeks declaratory

judgment of non-infringement, patent invalidity, patent unenforceability and implied license. 

Defendants Forgent Networks, Inc. (“Forgent”) and Compression Labs, Inc. (“CLI”) move to

dismiss or, in the alternative, stay this action due to a multi-district litigation proceeding

currently pending before Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton of this District. Plaintiff also moves to

consolidate this action with the actions before Judge Hamilton in MDL No. 1654. This order

GRANTS defendants’ motion for a temporary stay.

STATEMENT

The underlying dispute in this action revolves around United States Patent

No. 4,698,672 (“the ’672 patent”) entitled “Coding System for Reducing Redundancy.” This

patent is owned by defendant CLI, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Forgent. The ’672 patent

Case 5:05-cv-01567-JF Document 42 Filed 07/05/05 Page 1 of 3
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

covers methods and apparatus for compressing and decompressing digital data in accordance

with the JPEG standard, commonly used for compressing still photographic images. Plaintiff

Microsoft designs, makes and licenses several computer software products that operate in

accordance with the JPEG standard. Microsoft has licensed one or more of these products to

various entities who are currently involved in other lawsuits concerning the ’672 patent, either

as accused infringers in actions filed by CLI or as declaratory-judgment plaintiffs.

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation issued an order on February 16, 2005,

transferring eight actions concerning the ’672 patent (“the MDL actions”) to the Northern

District of California for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings before Judge

Hamilton. On April 28, 2005, Microsoft filed an administrative motion to consider whether the

above-captioned case should be related to the MDL actions. On May 6, 2005, Judge Hamilton

issued an order finding the cases related within the meaning of Civil Local Rule 3-12(a), but she

recused herself due to a financial interest in Microsoft. Because she found no basis for recusing

herself from the MDL actions, only this action was subsequently reassigned.

In addition to the motions pending before this Court, Microsoft has filed a motion to

intervene in the MDL proceedings. It urges Judge Hamilton to recuse herself from all of the

MDL actions and ask the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation reassign them to another

judge for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. That motion is scheduled to be

heard on August 17, 2005.

ANALYSIS

The power to grant a temporary stay “is incidental to the power inherent in every court

to control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself,

for counsel, and for litigants.” Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936). Here, it would

be an inefficient use of resources to unnecessarily duplicate the efforts of Judge Hamilton, who

will undoubtedly face all of the same issues in dealing with the MDL actions. Staying the

proceedings will thus best serve the interests of judicial economy.

Moreover, granting defendants’ motion for a temporary stay avoids the possibility of

inconsistent rulings. Indeed, plaintiff’s motion to consolidate this action with the MDL actions

Case 5:05-cv-01567-JF Document 42 Filed 07/05/05 Page 2 of 3
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

3

may be rendered moot if Judge Hamilton recuses herself and the MDL actions are all reassigned

to another judge. Finally, no party will be unduly prejudiced by a temporary stay pending the

decisions of Judge Hamilton and the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. Since

Microsoft’s motion before Judge Hamilton is already scheduled to be heard on August 17,

2005, any delay suffered is likely to be minimal.

CONCLUSION

For all of these reasons, defendant’s motion for a temporary stay is GRANTED. In the

interim, the Court declines to rule on defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter

jurisdiction or plaintiff’s motion to consolidate. The hearings on these motions, currently

scheduled for JULY 14, 2005 AT 8:00 A.M. and JULY 28, 2005 AT 8:00 A.M., are both VACATED. 

The case management conference, currently scheduled for JULY 14, 2005, is continued until

SEPTEMBER 8, 2005 AT 11:00 A.M.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 5, 2005 WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:05-cv-01567-JF Document 42 Filed 07/05/05 Page 3 of 3