• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Active Filters1
2 results

InMode Ltd. v. BTL Industries, Inc.

Docket 1:24-cv-12955, Massachusetts District Court (Nov. 27, 2024)
Judge Patti B. Saris, presiding
Patent
DivisionBoston
FlagsPATENT
Cause35:271 Patent Infringement
Case Type830 Patent
Tags830 Patent, 830 Patent
Plaintiff InMode Ltd.
Defendant BTL INDUSTRIES INC
Plaintiff Inmode LTD.
...
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

No. 150 District Judge Patti B. Saris: ORDER entered

Document InMode Ltd. v. BTL Industries, Inc., 1:24-cv-12955, No. 150 (D.Mass. Mar. 27, 2025)
After a hearing and review of the briefs, the affidavit of Brandon Nye, Vice President of Sales at Invasix Inc. (a wholly owned subsidiary of InMode), and the parties’ supplemental filings, the Court stays this action pending IPR.
As part of its “inherent power to manage its docket by staying proceedings,” a district court may “stay an action pending the resolution of a related matter in the” PTAB.
Even now, the case remains “in its incipient stages,” with merits discovery just beginning and claim construction, summary judgment motions, and a trial well in the future.
In determining that this factor favors a stay, the Court declines InMode’s request to assess the merits of the invalidity grounds that BTL is pressing in the IPR.
InMode has presented convincing evidence that the parties are direct competitors at least as to their products that use radiofrequency to treat female genital tissue, i.e., InMode’s FormaV handpiece and BTL’s EmFemme 360 applicator.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Can’t find a case you think should be here?

Use our supplemental search tool to find dockets that you may not see here. Information on Fees

Start a Supplemental Search