IMHO The Patent Claims assurted against Arcsolft are not identical to Dropcam. The Patents asserted against Acsolft are not identical. Therfore, there could be a partial stay granted regarding the Patents under IPR Grant. Additionally, the Patents asserted against AcSoft that are not under IPR Grant could move forward in the District Court Markman. The ArcSolf case IMHO should move forward partially modified. ArcSolf is and has been ridiing on the Dropcam case IPR. Thus, with no skin in the game IPR related costs. IMHO Team Handle will point out the fact ArcSolf has had a number of "Months" to request IPR on Patents asserted againt them but has not. IMHO the Judge will consider the tactical advantages and or disadvantages in Granting a Stay or Partial Stay.