A federal judge in Delaware on Tuesday delayed making any decision on a sanctions motion alleging Samsung had filed a “duplicative” suit, saying it would be ”inappropriate and inefficient” to rule on the issue until a federal appeals court could review the case.

The one-page order from U.S. District Judge Mark A. Kearney, at least for the moment, threw cold water on Imperium IP Holdings' bid to recover $247,000 in attorney fees in a breach-of-contract case.

That action, filed in Delaware came on the heels of a $21 million patent infringement ruling against Samsung Electronics Co. in a Texas federal court.

Imperium said that in filing the breach of contract action, the Korea-based electronics giant engaged in unnecessary and duplicative litigation, causing it to incur the legal expenses.

Imperium's Oct. 24 motion echoed Kearney's own criticisms just two weeks before that the Delaware suit was a “classic” example of tactical litigation meant to work around an adverse result in another jurisdiction. Samsung's “bad-faith” tactics, Imperium said, had qualified the case as exceptional under U.S. patent law, and the court retained the ability to award fees based on Samsung's decision to “unreasonably and vexatiously” multiply proceedings.

Samsung, which has appealed Kearney's dismissal, opposed the motion, saying an upcoming ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit could render moot Imperium's attempt to claw back fees. The Third Circuit last week directed both parties to address the proper venue appeal of the breach of contract claims, specifically why it should not be transferred to the Federal Circuit, which has exclusive jurisdiction over civil actions arising under U.S. patent laws.

In a one-page order, Kearney said the district court was not prepared to rule on the “exceptional nature of this case or find unreasonable conduct while the issues are before our court of appeals.”

But Kearney, a visiting judge from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, also appeared to clarify his position on Samsung's behavior, saying that he had seen no misleading or bad-faith conduct on the part of the electronics-maker. The earlier ruling, he said, intended only to stress that Samsung could not litigate the same issues in two places, and it should not have been taken as an invitation for Imperium to apply for fees.

“We did not intend to amplify a contested proceeding and trust experienced counsel will understand their success on one day on a contested issue is not a warrant for fee-shifting,” Kearney said in a footnote. “Before spending more of its litigation budget, we urge defendant to thoughtfully frame a renewed motion.”

Imperium may renew its motion for attorney fees within 30 days of a ruling from the Third Circuit. An attorney for the company did not comment on Kearney's ruling.

An attorney for Samsung was not immediately available to comment.

The breach of contract suit in Delaware is related to an action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, where Imperium won a $7 million jury verdict against Samsung for infringing patents for taking photos with an electronic device.

U.S. District Judge Amos L. Mazzant III of the Eastern District of Texas last year tripled the damages in the case, after finding Samsung had willfully infringed and repeatedly lied under oath.

Samsung has appealed the damage award to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

The Delaware case, now before the Third Circuit, is captioned Samsung Electronics v. Imperium IP Holdings.