Legal Opinion
Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp. v. Hilti, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Decided October 2, 2015No. Case Nos. 14-CV-1288-JPS, 14-CV-1296-JPS, 14-CV-1289-JPS, 14-CV-1295-JPSPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
J.P. STADTMUELLER, District Judge.
On August 5, 2015, in the above-captioned cases, the defendants filed motions to stay1 pending completion of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (“USPTÓ”) inter partes review (“IPR”).2 The motions *1034are now fully briefed' and ready for disposition. After careful consideration, the Court-will grant the defendants’ motions to stay. ( ■ .
1, BACKGROUND
The Court finds it helpful to begin its discussion with a general overview of the relatively new IPR process, followed by factual background specific to the above-captioned cases.
1.1 IPR Procedure
IPR is a…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Landis v. North American Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
- McKart v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Ethicon, Inc. v. Donald J. Quigg, Commissioner of Patents & Trademarks and the United States Patent & Trademark OfficeCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
- Virtualagility Inc. v. salesforce.com, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2014
- Texas Independent Producers and Royalty Owners Association v. Environmental Protection AgencyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2005
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- InVue Security Products Inc. v. Vanguard Products Group, Inc.District Court, M.D. Florida · 2019
- Mantissa Corporation v. Old Second Bancorp, IncDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2018