UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
April 8, 2013
LIFESCAN, INC., ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
SHASTA TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Jon S. Tigar United States District Judge
ORDER STAYING ACTION Re: Dkt. Nos. 83, 84, 85
United States District Court Northern District of California
A motion for a preliminary injunction is pending in this action for violations of the Lanham Act. See Dkt. No. 14. On March 19, 2013, two days before the hearing on the pending 15 motion, District Judge Davila granted a motion for a preliminary injunction in LifeScan, Inc. et al. 16 v. Shasta Techs., LLC et al., Case No. 11-cv-4494 (EJD) ("the LifeScan patent case"), which 17 barred the production and sale of the product at issue in this action. 18
The Court issued an order to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack 19 of a case or controversy and requiring each party to make a proposal as to how to address the 20 pending preliminary injunction motion and the case as a whole in light of the injunction issued in 21 the LifeScan patent case. Dkt. No. 83. 22
In its response to that order, each party requests that the preliminary injunction motion and 23 all other proceedings in this case be stayed pending (1) the resolution of the motion to stay the 24 enforcement of the injunction in the LifeScan patent case, which currently is pending before Judge Davila, and (2) the resolution of the motion to stay pending appeal that Defendants intend to file in 26 the Federal Circuit in the event that Judge Davila denies their motion to stay. See Dkt. No. 84 at 27 4; Dkt. No. 85 at 2. 28
Based on the parties' submissions, this action is STAYED pending the final determination 2 of the enforcement of the injunction issued by Judge Davila. Within seven days of the date on 3 which the final determination is issued, the parties shall file a joint status report that explains the 4 impact of that determination on this action. All pending motions in this action are 5
TERMINATED without prejudice, and all case deadlines are VACATED. 6
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.