ORDER

LEE H. ROSENTHAL, Chief District Judge.

In November 2018, Innovex moved for a stay while the Patent Trial and Appeal Board considered whether to grant inter partes review of the '439 Patent. (Docket Entry No. 65). The court then declined to stay the case, without prejudice, permitting the parties to seek a stay if the Patent Board chose to institute review. (Docket Entry No. 78). Because Baker Hughes responded to Innovex's inter partes petition on January 16, 2019, the Patent Board must decide whether to institute review by April 16, 2019. 35 U.S.C. § 314(b); (Docket Entry No. 84). The parties have filed claim-construction briefs on the disputed terms. (Docket Entry Nos. 86, 91). A Markman hearing is set for April 17, 2019.

If the Patent Board chooses to institute review, a stay may be warranted while the Patent Board considers claim validity. See NFC Tech. LLC v. HTC Am., Inc., No. 13-CV-1058-WCB, 2015 WL 1069111, at *6 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 11, 2015) ("[C]ourts have been nearly uniform in granting motions to stay proceedings in the trial court after the [Patent Board] has instituted inter partes review proceedings."). To give the parties and the court time to assess the Patent Board's decision on inter partes review and whether that decision warrants a stay, the court reschedules the Markman hearing for May 16, 2019, at 8:30 a.m. The parties are to promptly notify the court of the Board's decision and the parties' views on whether a stay is appropriate and, if so, for how long.