"The Court agrees with [plaintiff] that extensive motion practice . . . should be assessed in connection with the motion to stay. However, the Court concurs with the Accused Parties that same motion practice is not automatically equated with progress in the litigation, and in this case, does not negate the fact that there have been no depositions, no documents exchanged, and, according to the Accused Parties, 'virtually no discovery other than discovery that the accused parties had to engage in related to the prior art.' "
Yodlee, Inc. v. Ablaise Ltd., 4-06-cv-07222 (CAND January 16, 2009, Order)
No comments:
Post a Comment