A Blog About Intellectual Property Litigation and the District of Delaware


Clock
Akram Huseyn, Unsplash

On Monday, we posted about how the Court had denied a motion to bring a discovery dispute, because a 12-minute meet-and-confer was not long enough.

If you were curious, as I was, about how long of a meet-and-confer would be sufficient, we now have a data point. The parties re-filed their letter after conducting an additional 19-minute meet-and-confer, and the Court granted their motion and permitted them to bring the dispute to the Court.

So the data points we have so far are that 12 minutes is insufficient, and that two meet-and-confers totaling 31 minutes (12+19) were sufficient.

There is obviously a range of times in between those numbers that might or might not be long enough. But hopefully we can all get on the same page that the length of the meet-and-confer call matters, and that the parties need to bottom out on the issues before bringing them to the Court (which has always been true).

Also: Some Guidance on How to Bring a Stay Motion

In the same case, Inari Medical, Inc. v. Inquis Medical, Inc., C.A. No. 24-1023-CFC-EGT (D. Del.), the parties argued about whether a motion to stay should be brought as a discovery dispute or under the motion to stay procedures in the Court's scheduling order.

The defendant filed a motion to stay pending resolution of a motion to dismiss. The plaintiff argued that the relief defendant sought was not a true stay (which would include staying the motion to dismiss), but was instead a stay of discovery. D.I. 29.

The Court let the parties know that the motion to stay pending resolution of a motion to dismiss was properly brought as a freestanding motion, rather than a discovery dispute:

32 ORAL ORDER re 29 - The Court does not consider Defendant's pending motion to stay (D.I. 23) to be a discovery dispute. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that briefing on Defendant's motion to stay shall proceed pursuant to the Local Rules. ORDERED by Judge Eleanor G. Tennyson on 1/30/2025. (lah) (Entered: 01/30/2025)

Inari Medical, Inc. v. Inquis Medical, Inc., C.A. No. 24-1023-CFC-EGT, D.I. 32 (D. Del. Jan. 30, 2025)

This is actually something that comes up occasionally in cases before any judge, so it's good to have some guidance on it—although it's possible other judges could view it differently. Also, keep in mind that some of the judges have specific procedures regarding motions to stay that are different from the local rules.

If you enjoyed this post, consider subscribing to receive free e-mail updates about new posts.

All

Similar Posts