In Re SPROUTS FARMERS MARKET, INC.
This text of In Re SPROUTS FARMERS MARKET, INC. (In Re SPROUTS FARMERS MARKET, INC.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Case: 20-116 Document: 16 Page: 1 Filed: 03/25/2020
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________
In re: SPROUTS FARMERS MARKET, INC., SPROUTS FARMERS MARKET TEXAS, LP, dba Sprouts Farmers Market, Petitioners ______________________
2020-116 ______________________
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas in No. 6:19- cv-00417-ADA, United States District Judge Alan D. Al- bright. ______________________
ON PETITION ______________________
Before PROST, Chief Judge, NEWMAN and HUGHES, Circuit Judges.
NEWMAN, Circuit Judge. ORDER Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc. and Sprouts Farmers Market Texas, LP (collectively, “Sprouts”) petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to direct the United States Dis- trict Court for the Western District of Texas to grant their motion to stay proceedings. Motion Offense, LLC opposes. Case: 20-116 Document: 16 Page: 2 Filed: 03/25/2020
2 IN RE: SPROUTS FARMERS MARKET, INC.
Motion Offense has sued Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc. and its Austin, Texas based subsidiary in the Western Dis- trict of Texas, asserting that Sprouts’ use of Dropbox, Inc.’s software infringes two patents. A month after Motion Of- fense filed this complaint, Dropbox filed its own suit against Motion Offense in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, seeking declaratory judgments that the same Dropbox software product does not directly or indirectly infringe the same asserted patents. Sprouts moved the Western District of Texas to stay proceedings pending the outcome of Dropbox’s suit based on the principles underlying the so-called “customer-suit exception.” The Western District of Texas denied the mo- tion. Sprouts then filed this petition seeking to compel a stay. After the petition was filed, the District of Delaware, pending the resolution of Sprouts’ petition, has decided to transfer the Dropbox case to the Western District of Texas so that both suits could be resolved by one court. Only exceptional circumstances, amounting to a clear abuse of discretion or judicial usurpation of power, will jus- tify the extraordinary remedy of mandamus. In re Cordis Corp., 769 F.2d 733, 736 (Fed. Cir. 1985). We are not pre- pared to say that Sprouts has met that very demanding standard here. With the Dropbox case now also in the Western District of Texas, there is no longer the concern of having two different courts adjudicating the same issues with the risk of reaching inconsistent judgments. Although we deny Sprouts’ petition for mandamus re- lief, now that both related cases are in the Western District of Texas, we expect the district court to consider whether the most efficient resolution entails staying or consolidat- ing at least some of the underlying proceedings. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: The petition is denied. Case: 20-116 Document: 16 Page: 3 Filed: 03/25/2020
IN RE: SPROUTS FARMERS MARKET, INC. 3
FOR THE COURT
March 25, 2020 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Date Peter R. Marksteiner Clerk of Court
s31
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re SPROUTS FARMERS MARKET, INC., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-sprouts-farmers-market-inc-cafc-2020.