Viavi Solutions Inc. v. Platinum Optics Technology Inc.
- Edward Davila
- 5:20-cv-05501
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Viavi Solutions v. Platinum Optics, Judge Davila granted reconsideration, ordered dismissal of ’369-patent claims, and directed lifting the stay.
Viavi Solutions Inc. and Platinum Optics Technology Inc.; the order required Viavi to dismiss the ’369-patent claims and directed that the stayed case proceed after that dismissal.
What happened
Viavi Solutions Inc. sued Platinum Optics Technology Inc., claiming that its optical filters infringed three Viavi patents. The court had paused the case while patent challenges were reviewed by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Viavi asked the court to reconsider its earlier refusal to end the pause. The court found that circumstances had changed and that continuing the pause would no longer simplify the case or trial.
The court granted reconsideration and ordered Viavi to dismiss all claims involving the ’369 patent by March 7, 2022. After that dismissal, the court directed that the pause be lifted and that further proceedings be scheduled. Judge Edward J. Davila issued the order.
The detailed version
- Viavi Solutions Inc. v. Platinum Optics Technology Inc. · No. 5:20-cv-05501
- Edward Davila
- Mar. 2, 2022
Background
Viavi Solutions Inc. sued Platinum Optics Technology Inc. (PTOT), alleging that PTOT manufactured and sold optical filters infringing U.S. Patent Nos. 9,354,369, 9,588,269, and 10,222,526. The court stayed, or paused, the case on May 11, 2021, while the Patent Trial and Appeal Board considered inter partes review petitions that PTOT had filed challenging all but one of the asserted patent claims. The court later denied Viavi’s motion to lift the stay.
Viavi then moved for reconsideration of that denial. Reconsideration is a request for the court to revisit an earlier order. The court decided the motion without oral argument.
Court’s Analysis
The court found that the factual circumstances concerning the status of the three patent reviews had changed. As a result, it concluded that continuing the stay would no longer simplify the issues or the trial. The court noted that the question whether Viavi and PTOT compete against one another in the United States remained open, but stated that this question alone did not justify keeping the stay in place.
The court also relied on Viavi’s earlier representation that, if inter partes review were instituted for the ’369 patent, Viavi would dismiss all claims concerning that patent. The court stated that it would hold Viavi to that representation.
Order and Effect
The court granted Viavi’s motion for reconsideration. It ordered Viavi to dismiss all claims asserting the ’369 patent by March 7, 2022. After that dismissal, the court ordered that the stay be lifted and that a schedule for further proceedings be set. Judge Edward J. Davila signed the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.