Magistrate Judge Christopher J. Burke recently considered declaratory judgment Plaintiff Alstom Grid LLC’s request to stay this case pending the Court’s resolution of its Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings based on lack of patentability under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Alstom Grid LLC v. Certified Measurement, LLC, C.A. No. 15-72-LPS-CJB (D. Del. May 16, 2016). Judge Burke considered the three factors governing stay motions and ultimately denied the requested stay. Regarding the simplification factor, Judge Burke noted that due to the number of asserted patents and claims, there is a likelihood that “at least some number of claims will survive the motion to dismiss[,]” even if it is granted. Id. at 2. Regarding the status of the litigation, Judge Burke noted that the stay was requested 14 months into the litigation and well into the claim construction process. Id. at 2-3. Finally, regarding undue prejudice to the non-moving party, Judge Burke noted that Alstom may be seeking “an inappropriate tactical advantage” by requesting the stay now, rather than when it filed its § 101 motion in September 2015. Id. at 3. In fact, Alstom opposed Certified Measurement’s motion to stay pending inter partes review proceedings. Id. at 3. In denying the stay request, the Court also noted that the case had already “been stayed once, to little beneficial effect.” Id. at 4 n.3.