As always, there may not be sufficient context to fully appreciate the rulings, but they are still worth reviewing (and there are a lot).
Defendant challenged the plaintiff’s technical and damages experts in this Austin patent infringement case.
The issue was whether a plaintiff had to produce its experts’ reports and depo transcripts from a prior case.
Plaintiff won four of its seven challenges to this expert’s opinions.
Mostly limine with a side of motion to exclude and a doggie bag of MSJ and expert rulings.
The plaintiff sought leave to supplement two of its experts’ reports to account for a settlement after the expert disclosure deadline.
Plaintiff sought to exclude certain opinions by the defense expert on written description, divided infringement, source code, and noninfringing alternatives.
This order arising from a recent pretrial conference provides an example of the type of rulings that parties receive on the eve of trial from Judge Gilstrap.
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.
It took five orders to sort out the objections to experts in this case. (More may have fallen behind the refrigerator and I’m not getting them out if they did – three is plenty).