United States District Court
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SHERMAN DIVISION
IMPERIUM IP HOLDINGS (CAYMAN), §
LTD. §
§ CIVIL ACTION No. 4:14-CV-371
v. § Judge Mazzant
§
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., §
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, §
INC., SAMSUNG §
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, §
LLC, AND SAMSUNG SEMICONDUCTOR, §
INC. §
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court are several motions ruled on orally on January 29, 2016. On September 30, 2015, Defendants filed a Motion to Strike Products Imperium Failed to Accuse in Its ‘029 Contentions from Imperium’s Expert’s Report (Dkt. #135). Plaintiff filed a response on October 19, 2015 (Dkt. #145). On October 29, 2015, Defendants filed a reply (Dkt. #150). On November 9, 2015 Defendants filed a sur-reply (Dkt. #158). After consideration of the motion and the relevant pleadings, the Court determined at pretrial that the motion should be denied (Trial Tr. 1/29/16 at 5:1-5).
On October 16, 2015, Defendants filed a Motion to Strike Portions of Dr. Cameron H.G. Wright’s Rebuttal Report Concerning Validity Positions Not Previously Disclosed by Imperium (Dkt. #143). On November 2, 2015, Defendants filed a response (Dkt. #153). On November 12, 2015, Plaintiff filed a reply (Dkt. #162). On November 23, 2015, Defendants filed a sur-reply (Dkt. #168). After consideration of the motion and the relevant pleadings, the Court determined at pretrial that the motion should be denied (Trial Tr. 1/29/16 at 4:19-21).
2On December 8, 2015, Defendants filed a Motion for Leave to File Further Claim Construction Briefing (Dkt. #180). On December 21, 2015, Plaintiff filed a response (Dkt. #185). On December 23, 2015, Defendants filed a reply (Dkt. #187). On December 28, 2015, Defendants filed a sur-reply (Dkt. #190). After consideration of the motion and the relevant pleadings, the Court determined at pretrial that the motion should be denied (Trial Tr. 1/29/16 at 4:22-23).
On December 23, 2015, Defendants filed a Motion for Leave to Submit Supplemental Expert Reports (Dkt. #186). On January 11, 2016, Plaintiff filed a response (Dkt. #200). On January 22, 2016, Defendants filed a reply (Dkt. #220). After consideration of the motion and the relevant pleadings, the Court determined at pretrial that the motion should be denied (Trial Tr. 1/29/16 at 4:24-25).
It is therefore ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Strike Products Imperium Failed to Accuse in Its ‘029 Contentions from Imperium’s Expert’s Report (Dkt. #135) is hereby DENIED.
It is further ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Strike Portions of Dr. Cameron H.G. Wright’s Rebuttal Report Concerning Validity Positions Not Previously Disclosed by Imperium (Dkt. #143) is hereby DENIED.
It is further ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Leave to File Further Claim Construction Briefing (Dkt. #180) is hereby DENIED.
It is further ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Leave to Submit Supplemental Expert Reports (Dkt. #186) is hereby DENIED.