Datanet LLC v. Microsoft Corporation

Opinion

1 THE HONORABLE JAMAL N. WHITEHEAD

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 9 DATANET, LLC, 10 Case No. 2:22-cv-01545-JNW

11 Plaintiff, JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER

REGARDING STAY PENDING INTER 12 v. PARTES REVIEW

13 MICROSOFT CORPORATION, NOTED ON MOTION CALENDAR: May 14, 2024 14 Defendant. 15

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER 1 WHEREAS, Plaintiff Datanet, LLC (“Datanet”) and Defendant Microsoft Corporation 2 (“Microsoft”) (collectively, “Parties”) are parties to the above-captioned case; 3 WHEREAS, in the above-captioned case, Datanet alleges that Microsoft has infringed and 4 is infringing one or more claims of each of U.S. Patent No. 8,473,478 (the “’478 patent”), U.S. 5 Patent No. 9,218,348 (the “’348 patent”), and U.S. Patent No. 10,585,850 (the “’850 patent”) 6 (collectively, the “Asserted Patents”); 7 WHEREAS, Microsoft filed three petitions for inter partes review (“IPR”) on October 31, 8 2023 challenging the patentability of all asserted claims of the Asserted Patents; 9 WHEREAS, on November 1, 2023, Microsoft moved to stay this case pending institution 10 of the IPR proceedings (Dkt. 45), which the Court denied without prejudice pending institution 11 decisions on the IPRs (Dkt. 69); 12 WHEREAS, the Court has scheduled a technology tutorial to occur on May 31, 2024 and 13 a claim construction hearing for June 12, 2024 (Dkt. 72); 14 WHEREAS, the Court struck the trial date and related deadlines set forth in Dkt. Nos. 40 15 and 63, and the Court ordered the parties to file a joint status report, within ten days of receiving 16 the PTAB’s institution decisions, that includes proposed dates for the remaining case schedule 17 (Dkt. 72 at 2); 18 WHEREAS, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) instituted IPR for all asserted 19 claims of the Asserted Patents on May 8, 2024, and is expected to issue a final written decision 20 within one year thereafter; 21 WHEREAS, Microsoft indicated that it intends to move to stay this case pending final 22 resolution of the IPR proceedings and Datanet does not oppose such a stay; 23 WHEREAS, this case is in an early stage, claim construction has not yet occurred, and 24 courts in this district routinely stay patent litigation matters involving instituted PTAB proceedings 25 (see, e.g., WAG Acquisition, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc., No. 2:22-CV-1424JLR, 2023 WL 1991888, 26 at *2 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 14, 2023); Uniloc 2017 LLC v. HTC Am., Inc., No. 2:18-CV-1732RSM, JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER 1 2020 WL 7418076, at *2 (W.D. Wash. Dec. 18, 2020); Supercell Oy v. Rothschild Digit. Media 2 Innovations, LLC, No. 2:15-CV-1119JLR, 2016 WL 9226493, at *2 (W.D. Wash. July 28, 2016)); 3 WHEREAS, in the interest of avoiding unnecessary motion practice, and to conserve 4 judicial resources, the Parties have agreed to stay this case pending final resolution of the IPR 5 proceedings; 6 WHEREAS, this Court has previously approved such joint stipulations to stay a case 7 pending final resolution of IPR proceedings (see, e.g., humangear, inc. v. Industrial Revolution, 8 Inc., No. 2:23-cv-00102, Dkt. 20 (W.D. Wash. July 28, 2023); Surfcast Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 9 No. 2:22-cv-01298, Dkt. 67 (W.D. Wash. Oc. 12, 2022); Uniloc USA, Inc. v. HTC Am., Inc., No. 10 2:17-cv-1558, Dkt. 80 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 18, 2019)); 11 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the Parties, subject to approval of the Court, that 12 1. All proceedings in the above-captioned action shall be STAYED pending final 13 resolution, including any appeals, of the IPR proceedings on the Asserted Patents; 14 2. The case schedule as set forth in the Minute Order (Dkt. 72) shall be vacated; and 15 3. The Parties shall file a Joint Status Report within 10 days of the later of: (i) the last 16 of the three Final Written Decisions from the PTAB in the IPR proceedings, (ii) dismissal of the 17 IPR proceedings, or (iii) other resolution of the IPR proceedings, including the conclusion of any 18 appeals on the IPRs. 19 DATED this 14th day of May, 2024. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER 1 MESSNER REEVES LLP MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

2 /s/ Isaac S. Crum /s/ Molly A. Terwilliger Gregory P. Sitrick (pro hac vice) Molly A. Terwilliger, WSBA No. 28449 3 Isaac S. Crum (pro hac vice) Patty Eakes, WBSA No. 18888 Sharif Ahmed (pro hac vice) 4 MESSNER REEVES LLP Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 7250 N. 16th Street, Suite 410 1301 Second Avenue, Suite 2800 5 Phoenix, AZ 85020 Seattle, WA 98101 gsitrick@messner.com T: (206) 274-6400 6 icrum@messner.com F: (206) 274-6401 sahmed@messner.com molly.terwilliger@morganlewis.com 7 patty.eakes@morganlewis.com Bradley S. Keller, WSBA #10665 8 Jofrey M. McWilliam, WSBA #28441 Natalie Bennett (admitted pro hac vice) 1000 Second Avenue, 38th Floor 9 Seattle, Washington 98104 Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 206-622-2000 1111 Pennsylvania Ave NW 10 Fax: 206-622-2522 Washington, DC 20004 bkeller@byrneskeller.com T: (202) 739-3000 11 jmcwilliam@byrneskeller.com F: (202) 739-3001 natalie.bennett@morganlewis.com 12 Attorneys for Plaintiff Datanet LLC Andrew V. Devkar (admitted pro hac vice) 13 Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 2049 Century Park East, Suite 700 14 Los Angeles, CA 90067 15 T: (310) 255-1000 F: (310) 255-2000 16 andrew.devkar@morganlewis.com 17 Karon N. Fowler (admitted pro hac vice) MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 18 110 North Wacker Drive, Suite 2800 Chicago, IL 60606-1511 19 karon.fowler@morganlewis.com 20 Austin L. Zuck (admitted pro hac vice) Katerina Hora Jacobson (admitted pro hac vice) 21 MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 22 1400 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 94304 23 (650) 843-4000 austin.zuck@morganlewis.com 24 katerina.horajacobson@morganlewis.com 25 Attorneys for Defendant Microsoft Corporation

26 JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER 1 IT IS SO ORDERED.

2 DATED this 15th day of May, 2024 3

4 A 5 Jamal N. Whitehead United States District Judge 6

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER