Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Korea Corporation v. LG Electronics, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 15-691-LPS, June 17, 2016.

Stark, J. Defendants’ renewed motion to stay pending IPR is denied.

Most of the claims at issue will not be at issue in the IPR proceeding which weighs against a stay. This motion was filed when the case was in its early stages. While some progress has been made, a Markman hearing is still months away in November. Nothing suggests there is anything unduly prejudicial or that there are unfair tactics in play. Denying the stay mitigates the harm from the delay in seeking redress for alleged infringement. The parties are competitors in a very crowded field. This fact suggests money damages is adequate to compensate and weighs in favor of a stay. Balancing the stay factor does not favor either side. The court therefore denies the motion since the movant did not show the equities tilted in its favor.