In another example of the way that patent-heavy courts benefit from one another’s expertise, Judge Albright just issued a set of standard set of limine rulings (1-23) and limit of 5 additional motions per side that is substantively identical to Judge Gilstrap’s.
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.
My article on Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap’s new standing order on motions in limine was published on IAM last week – it’s accessible to subscribers here. Unlike most of my writing, which is perhaps more directed towards practitioners, it is focused on what clients might want to know about the order. The principal takeaway is that it ought to save clients money, and help inform them what sorts of issues and arguments are off the table in Judge Gilstrap’s court.
In a sua sponte order, Judge Gilstrap revises limine practice.
As always, there may not be sufficient context to fully appreciate the rulings, but they are still worth reviewing (and there are a lot).
Magistrate Judge Bray issued several orders in the run-up to trial in this trademark case.
Mostly limine with a side of motion to exclude and a doggie bag of MSJ and expert rulings.
Pretty standard rulings, but limine orders are always worth checking to see what is presumptively out.
First the ruling. Judge Mazzant precluded certain evidence and arguments related to certain third-party advertisements and sales.
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.
