SherryWear, LLC v. Nike, Inc. (D. Mass. 23-cv-11599).

SherryWear sued Nike last summer for allegedly infringing eight patents relating to sports bras with pockets.  Following a claim construction order in July (which generally sided with Nike’s proposed constructions), Nike moved to stay the case pending a decision by the PTO on Nike’s requests for Inter Partes review .

Judge Sorokin granted Nike’s motion.  He noted that IPR was sought on all eight patents, meaning that all of the issues in the case could potentially be narrowed or eliminated through IPR.  He further noted that the decision on whether to institute IPR would occur around mid-January, meaning that the resulting delay would only be a few months, should the IPR requests be denied.  He determined that SherryWear had not identified any meaningful prejudice that would arise by such a delay – there was no assertion that the two parties were direct competitors and SherryWear waited four years to sue and had not sought injunctive relief since discovering the alleged infringement in 2019.  Should the IPR’s be granted, these factors still suggest that SherryWear would not be unduly prejudiced so as to overcome the preference for having the PTAB bring its subject-matter expertise to the invalidity question.  Accordingly, Judge Sorokin stayed the case pending the earlier of institution decisions or January 24, 2025.