Norman IP Holdings, LLC v. Lexmark International, Inc., et. al., 6-11-cv-00495 (TXED August 10, 2012, Order) (Davis, J.).
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Multi-Defendant Case Severed Per AIA (§ 299), But Consolidated for Pre-Trial With Venue Issues Delayed Until After Claim Construction.
After granting defendants' motion to sever and consolidating the cases for pre-trial purposes, the court issued an order retaining all cases through the claim construction phase, even if pending motions to transfer were or would be granted. "This serves two important purposes. First, it conserves judicial resources by requiring only one district court to address the underlying disputed claim terms. . . . Second, this case management approach ensures that the related patent cases proceed initially on a consistent claim construction, thus avoiding inconsistent rulings. However, this case management approach should not be perceived as an invitation to file motions to transfer venue. . . . This Court currently has approximately forty pending motions to transfer venue. If the average cost of discovery and briefing for each of these transfer motions is only $300,000, then approximately $12 million is being spent by the parties on an issue that does not move the ball down the field, but only seeks a new field upon which to play."