If only:

District court judges have inherent and almost unfettered control over their own dockets. A decision to stay a case is reviewed for abuse of discretion—a very difficult standard to overcome on appeal. Further, district court judges have great flexibility in the types of stays they issue. For instance, in one Eastern District of Texas case, Judge Everingham granted a motion to stay the litigation based on the accused infringer’s ex parte reexamination request. In the order granting the stay, the court crafted a stipulation that the accused infringer must agree not to challenge the validity at trial of the patents-in-suit based on prior art patents or printed publications that were considered in the reexamination proceedings. Ordinarily, these estoppels only apply to inter partes reexams, and only after the proceeding has concluded. Further, the accused infringer was barred from directly or indirectly instituting any further reexamination proceedings, despite being statutorily allowed to do so.

http://reexamcenter.com/essentials/reexamination-timeline/

Perhaps, in future stay requests, a similar stipulation could be presented by PTSC/TPL?

.

.

.

Be well