Godox Photo Equipment Co. Ltd. v. Profoto Aktiebolag

Godox · United States District Court for the Western District of Washington · December 22, 2025 · No. C25-0502-KKE

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Washington granted Godox Photo Equipment Co. Ltd.’s motion to stay patent litigation pending ex parte reexamination of Profoto Aktiebolag’s U.S. Patent No. 11,630,375. The court concluded that the reexamination was likely to simplify the issues, the case was at an early stage, and the stay would not unduly prejudice Profoto. The court vacated most scheduling deadlines pending completion of the reexamination and directed the parties to file a joint status report afterward.

Holdings

  1. The court may stay the litigation pending the PTO's reexamination, and all three applicable factors favored granting a stay.
  2. Good cause supported permitting Godox to supplement the record with the PTO's Final Office Action issued after the motion to stay was filed.
  3. All deadlines in the scheduling order, except the deadline for Godox's response to Profoto's answer and counterclaims, were vacated pending completion of the PTO reexamination.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the court should stay the patent litigation pending the PTO's ex parte reexamination of the patent.
  2. Whether the factors of issue simplification, stage of litigation, and prejudice to the nonmoving party favored a stay.
  3. Whether Godox should be permitted to supplement the record with the PTO's Final Office Action.
  4. Whether Godox's request for a protective order should be denied as moot.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (21)

  • Procter & Gamble Co. v. Kraft Foods Glob., Inc., 549 F.3d 842, 849 (Fed. Cir. 2008)(followed)
  • Viskase Corp. v. Am. Nat'l Can Co., 261 F.3d 1316, 1328 (Fed. Cir. 2001)(followed)
  • ASCII Corp. v. STD Ent. USA, Inc., 844 F. Supp. 1378, 1380 (N.D. Cal. 1994)(followed)
  • Nat'l Prods., Inc. v. Gamber-Johnson LLC, No. 2:12-CV-00840, 2012 WL 3527938, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Aug. 14, 2012)(followed)
  • Polaris PowerLED Techs., LLC v. Nintendo Co., No. C22-0386JLR, 2023 WL 12134477, at *2-4 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 31, 2023)(followed)
  • Implicit Networks, Inc. v. Adv. Micro Devices, Inc., No. C08-184J, 2009 WL 357902, at *2 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 9, 2009)(followed)
  • Fresenius USA, Inc. v. Baxter Int'l, Inc., 721 F.3d 1330, 1340 (Fed. Cir. 2013)(followed)
  • SenoRx, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., No. CIV.A. 12-173-LPS, 2013 WL 144255, at *4 (D. Del. Jan. 11, 2013)(followed)
  • Gould v. Control Laser Corp., 705 F.2d 1340, 1342 (Fed. Cir. 1983)(followed)
  • Nat'l Prods. v. Innovative Intelligent Prods., LLC, No. 2:20-CV-00428-RAJ, 2021 WL 2636101, at *2 (W.D. Wash. June 25, 2021)(distinguished)

Showing top 10 of 21.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…