Depomed, Inc. v. Purdue Pharma LP et al, 3-13-cv-00571 (NJD July 9, 2014, Order) (Bongiovanni, M.J.)
Tuesday, July 15, 2014
No Stay Pending IPR Prior to Institution Decision
The court denied without prejudice defendant's motion to stay pending inter partes review because it was premature, but maintained the discovery stay pending the PTO's decision on the petitions for review. "While the approach taken by courts varies, a recent decision from this District held that the court would not address the defendants’ motion to stay pending IPR until after the PTO actually rendered a decision granting such review. There, like here, the defendants had applied for IPR, but such review had not yet been granted at the time the defendants moved to stay the underlining action. In light of this decision, the Court agrees with [plaintiff] that [defendants'] application to stay pending IPR is premature. . . . The Court finds that it would be inefficient to reopen discovery at this juncture given the fact that the PTO has at most 27 days to render its decision as to whether to grant the review requested by [defendants]."