Bell Semiconductor, LLC v. NXP USA, Inc.
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Cynthia Ann Bashant (author)
Analysis
The court considered Defendant NXP USA, Inc.'s unopposed motion to stay the civil action under 28 U.S.C. § 1659 pending the final determination of a related ITC investigation. The court granted the motion, staying the case and ordering periodic joint status reports.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Motion to Stay Proceeding granted“Hence, the Court GRANTS the Stay Motion (ECF No. 19) and STAYS this action pending final decision in ITC Investigation 337-TA-1340.” | agree with court The court correctly applied the mandatory stay provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1659. The statute requires a stay when a party to the civil action is also a respondent in an ITC proceeding and the claims involve the same issues. The order recites that the motion is unopposed and that the court finds the statute applies, which is consistent with the statutory text and the cited authority. The procedural orders for status reports are standard case management measures to ensure the stay is lifted promptly when the ITC proceeding concludes. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound. It correctly identifies the statutory basis for the stay (28 U.S.C. § 1659), cites the relevant Federal Circuit precedent regarding the purpose of the stay, and notes the motion is unopposed. The court's finding that the statute applies is consistent with the statutory language provided in the order. The inclusion of status report deadlines is appropriate for managing a stayed case.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BELL SEMICONDUCTOR, LLC, Case No. 22-cv-1527-BAS-KSC 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED 13 v. MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDING (ECF No. 19) 14 NXP USA, INC., 15 Defendant. 16 17 Before this Court is Defendant’s unopposed motion seeking a mandatory stay of the 18 instant case under 28 U.S.C. § 1659 until the determination of the United States 19 International Trade Commission (“Commission”) in Electronic Devices, Semiconductor 20 Devices and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1340 (“ITC Investigation 337-TA- 21 1340”), becomes final, including any appeals. (Stay Mot., ECF No. 19.) 22 Under 28 U.S.C. § 1659, “at the request of a party to the civil action that is also a 23 respondent in the proceeding before the Commission, the district court shall stay, until the 24 determination of the Commission becomes final proceedings in the civil action with respect 25 to any claim that involves the same issues involved in the proceeding before the 26 Commission.” The purpose of this mandatory stay “is to prevent separate proceedings on 27 the same issues occurring at the same time” and to avoid duplicative and inefficient 28 consumption of the court’s and the parties’ resources. In re Princo Corp., 478 F.3d 1345, 1 || 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2007); see also Polmyer Tech. Sys., Inc. vy. ACON Lab’ys, Inc., No. 18-CV- 2 ||0805-H-HLB, 2018 WL 3388123, at *2 (S.D. Cal. July 11, 2018) (applying stay provision). 3 The Court finds § 1659 applies here. Hence, the Court GRANTS the Stay Motion 4 ||(ECF No. 19) and STAYS this action pending final decision in ITC Investigation 337-TA- 5 || 1340. Further, the Court ORDERS the parties to file a joint status report by no later than 6 ||March 3, 2023, and to file a joint status report every six months thereafter until ITC 7 || Investigation 337-TA-1340 has concluded. The Court also ORDERS the parties to file a 8 ||joint status report within ten (10) days after the Commission issues its final decision in 9 || Investigation 337-TA-1340. 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. / , 11 DATED: January 5, 2023 Lin A (Ayphan 6 12 United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28