Procter & Gamble Co. v. Kraft Foods Global, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing “the inherent power of the district courts to grant a stay pending reexamination of a patent”
• rejecting patantee’s argument that a stay under Section 318 could not be granted when requested by an accused patent infringer
• counseling against issuance of a stay if the court has already granted a party’s request for preliminary injunctive relief
• The court has “consistently recognized the inherent power of the district courts to grant a stay pending reexamination of a patent.”
• The court has “consistently recognized the inherent power of the district courts to grant a stay pending reexamination of a patent.”
• The court has “consistently recognized the inherent power of the district courts to grant a stay pending reexamination of a patent.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).