`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`§
`
`CASE No. 2:22-CV-00141-JRG-RSP
`
`CARDWARE INC.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.
`AND SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS
`AMERICA, INC.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`ORDER
`
`Before the Court, defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics
`
`America, Inc. move to stay the case pending resolution of inter partes review (“IPR”) and post-
`
`grant review (“PGR”) proceedings before the USPTO. Dkt. No. 61. Notably, the petitions were filed
`
`between November of 2022 and January of 2023, meaning a decision to institute IPR and PGR has yet
`
`to occur. “ In this district, courts usually deny motions for stay when the PTAB has not acted on a
`
`petition for inter partes review.” Perdiemco LLC v. Telular Corp., 2017 WL 2444736, at *2 (E.D. Tex.
`
`June 6, 2017) (citing Trover Group, Inc. v. Dedicated Micros USA, 2015 WL 1069179, at *6 (E.D.
`
`Tex. Mar. 11 2015) (“In this district, that is not just the majority rule; it is the universal practice.”)).
`
`Accordingly, the motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as premature.
`
`CARDWARE EXHIBIT 2003
`SAMSUNG V. CARDWARE
`IPR2023-00314
`Page 1 of 1
`
`