Patent Case Watch

Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Weekly Digest
E.D. Tex.

GREE, Inc v. Supercell Oy, No. 2:19-cv-00070 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 25, 2020)

Adopted Report and recommendation (or magistrate's order) adopted
Daubert / Expert Challenges
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:19-cv-00070, Dkt. No. 413
Decided
August 25, 2020
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J. — Marshall
Document
Order
Docket Entry
ORDER - the Court OVERRULES Plaintiffs Objections Dkt. No. 378 andADOPTS Judge Paynes Memorandum Order Dkt. No. 357
Length
1 page
Download Opinion (PDF)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

GREE, INC., §

§

Plaintiff, §

§ Case No. 2:19-cv-00070-JRG-RSP

v. §

§ SUPERCELL OY, §

§

Defendant. §

ORDER

Plaintiff GREE, Inc. previously filed a Motion to Exclude Portions of Expert Testimony Pursuant to Daubert (Dkt. No. 199). Magistrate Judge Payne entered a Memorandum Order (Dkt. No. 357), granting-in-part as modified and denying-in-part Plaintiff’s Motion to Exclude. Plaintiff has filed Objections (Dkt. No. 378) to the Memorandum Order, with Defendant Supercell Oy filing a Response. (Dkt. No. 409). .

After reviewing the briefing on the Motion to Exclude, Judge Payne’s Memorandum Order, and the briefing on Plaintiff’s Objections, the Court agrees with the reasoning provided within the Memorandum Order and concludes that the Objections fail to show that the Memorandum Order was clearly erroneous or contrary to law.

Consequently, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff’s Objections (Dkt. No. 378) and ADOPTS Judge Payne’s Memorandum Order (Dkt. No. 357).

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 25th day of August, 2020.

RODNEY GILSTRAP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Text extracted from the official PDF and reflowed for reading. It is not a certified transcript — the PDF linked above is the authoritative document.

Analysis is coming soon.

A plain-English account of the issues, facts and holding, written by Patent Case Watch. The opinion itself — its full text, its PDF and everything else on this page — stays free to read for everyone, always.

Cite this opinion

GREE, Inc v. Supercell Oy, No. 2:19-cv-00070 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 25, 2020).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-txed-2_19-cv-00070-17
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-txed-2_19-cv-00070-17

No reporter citation is shown because the official source does not supply one; none is inferred here. Check the opinion and a citator before relying on this form.

Source: govinfo.gov USCOURTS collection · retrieved July 25, 2026 · Report an error

Other documents in this case