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

Weekly Digest
E.D. Tex.

Motio, Inc. v. BSP Software LLC, No. 4:12-cv-00647 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 19, 2016)

Granted in Part
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division
Case No.
No. 4:12-cv-00647, Dkt. No. 248
Decided
January 19, 2016
Judge
See opinion
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER RE 221 MOTION in Limine #1 TO EXCLUDE ARGUMENT AND EVIDENCE SUPPORTING CLAIMS OF NON-INFRINGEMENT NOT DISCLOSED IN RESPONSE TO CONTENTION INTERROGATORIES filed by Motio, Inc., 223 MOTION in Limine filed by Avnet…
Length
2 pages

United States District Court

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

MOTIO, INC. §

§ V. § CASE NO. 4:12-CV-647 § Judge Mazzant BSP SOFTWARE LLC, §

BRIGHTSTAR PARTNERS, INC., § and AVNET, INC. §

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Pending before the Court are Plaintiff and Defendants’ Motions in Limine (Dkts. #221-23). After considering the pleadings and hearing argument at a Pre-Trial Hearing on January 14, 2016, the Court rules on the motions as follows: Plaintiff’s Motion #1

Granted. Defendants shall not argue to the jury or present evidence at trial related to noninfringement arguments that were not disclosed in response to contention interrogatories dated June 27, 2013, and March 13, 2015 (Dkt. #221, Ex. A). Plaintiff’s Motion #2, Defendants’ Motion #1

Granted. Defendants shall not argue to the jury or present evidence at trial related to any of Defendants’ patents or the pending Illinois litigation and Plaintiff shall not introduce, argue or mention at trial Plaintiff’s counterclaims in the Illinois litigation. Defendants’ Motion #2

Granted. Plaintiff shall not introduce, argue or mention at trial Avnet’s Petition for Inter Partes Review and proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

2Defendants’ Motion #3

Granted. Plaintiff shall not introduce, argue or mention at trial testimony and argument that ICM infringes the patent-in suit. Defendants’ Motion #4 Denied. Defendants’ Motion #5

Granted. Plaintiff shall not introduce, argue or mention at trial Avnet’s size, total profits, or total revenues. Defendants’ Motion #6 Denied. Defendants’ Motion #7

Granted. Plaintiff shall not introduce, argue or mention at trial testimony by undisclosed witnesses Blackwell, Mullinax, Masson, and Adkinson. Defendants’ Oral Amendment

Granted. Plaintiff shall not introduce, argue or mention at trial the lawsuit filed by Plaintiff against BSP and individuals on January 13, 2016, in the District Court of Dallas County, Texas.

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

Motio, Inc. v. BSP Software LLC, No. 4:12-cv-00647 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 19, 2016).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-txed-4_12-cv-00647-10
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-txed-4_12-cv-00647-10

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.