Judge Albright issued a set of rulings in chart form from the pretrial conference held last week, including rulings on motions for summary judgment, expert testimony, and motions in limine. Of note is the court’s denial of the defendant’s motion for summary judgment as to priority date, finding that it was estopped from raising the issue based on its stipulation filed in the IPR proceedings.
The parties agreed that supplemental damages and prejudgment interest was recoverable, but disagreed as to the amounts. Judge Gilstrap resolved the disputes as to both.
The court granted the motion, awarding ongoing royalties in the amount of $1000 per unit, which was $200 higher than the rate awarded by the jury due to the patentee’s increased bargaining power after a jury verdict in its favor.
These three orders resolved motions to exclude expert testimony in a recent trial before Judge Albright.
Defendant challenged the plaintiff’s technical and damages experts in this Austin patent infringement case.
Most JMOLs get denied. That was certainly the case here following a damages retrial.
Mostly limine with a side of motion to exclude and a doggie bag of MSJ and expert rulings.
The parties filed four motions for summary judgment in this case. One was granted – can you guess what the subject was?
Judge Gilstrap ruled on defendant Apple’s postverdict motions in this case, which was tried to a jury in August 2020, and later had a damages-only retrial.
Pretty solid set of post-verdict motions at issue in this 54 page opinion, which ordered a new trial on damages.
