Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_02-cv-04483/USCOURTS-cand-3_02-cv-04483-21/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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

POSTX CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

 v.

SECURE DATA MOTION, INC. d/b/a/ SIGABA,

Defendant.

 /

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS

 /

No. C 02-04483 SI

ORDER DENYING SIGABA’S MOTION

FOR ENTRY OF PARTIAL JUDGMENT

PURSUANT TO FRCP 54(b)

Defendant and counterclaimant Sigaba has filed a motion for entry of partial judgment pursuant to

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). Sigaba seeks entry of judgment on its Restraint of Trade, Attempted

Monopolization and Conspiracy to Attempt Monopolization claims, which were adjudicated in summary

judgment orders filed on August 17, 2005, as amended by the Court’s August 31, 2005 order. Sigaba also

seeks an order staying the remainder of this action pending appeal of these orders to the Federal Circuit.

PostX opposes the motion.

The Court concludes that it is not in the interest of judicial administration or efficiency to enter a partial

judgment. See Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. Gen. Elec. Co., 446 U.S. 1, 8 (1980) (stating that it is up to the

“sound discretion of the district court” to determine whether a partial judgment is in the interest of judicial

administration). This case has been pending since 2002 and has been extensively litigated by both parties. The

trial date has been repeatedly moved, and is currently setfor February 2006. Moreover, Sigaba’s reply states

that it appears Mr. Cook’s health problems, which in large part prompted the Rule 54(b) motion, have

sufficiently abated such that it appears he will be able to participate in the February 21, 2006 trial. The Court

Case 3:02-cv-04483-SI Document 997 Filed 12/13/05 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

finds no reason to further delay the resolution of this case. 

Accordingly, the Court hereby DENIES Sigaba’s motion. [Doc. # 900].

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 9, 2005

 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:02-cv-04483-SI Document 997 Filed 12/13/05 Page 2 of 2