IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHALL DIVISION
GREE, INC., § §
Plaintiff, § §
v. §
Case No. 2:19-cv-00070-JRG-RSP § SUPERCELL OY, § §
Defendant. § §
ORDER
Defendant Supercell Oy previously filed a Motion for Summary Judgment of No Infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,604,137 and 9,956,481. (Dkt. No. 200.) Magistrate Judge Payne entered a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 355), recommending denial of Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff and Defendant have filed Objections to the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. Nos. 375, 379/395, respectively) and Responses (Dkt. Nos. 410, 415, respectively).
. After reviewing the briefing on the Motion for Summary Judgment de novo, the Report and Recommendation, and the briefing on Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s Objections, the Court agrees with the reasoning provided within the Report and Recommendation.
Consequently, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff’s Objections (Dkt. No. 375) , OVERRULES Defendant’s Objections (Dkt. No. 379; Dkt. No. 395) and ADOPTS Judge Payne’s Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 355). Furthermore, the Court finds Defendant’s Motion to Strike Dr. Akl’s Declaration (Dkt. No. 285) MOOT.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 9th day of September, 2020.