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.

Adaptix, Inc. v. Alcatel-Lucent USA, Inc. et al, No. 6:12-cv-00022 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 24, 2015)

Denied
Motion to Strike Daubert / Expert Challenges
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division
Case No.
No. 6:12-cv-00022, Dkt. No. 480
Decided
August 24, 2015
Judge
Caroline Craven, M.J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION AND ORDER Denying 463 Opposed SEALED MOTION to Strike Green's Supplemental Expert Report filed by AT&T Mobility LLC, Alcatel-Lucent USA, Inc., Sprint Spectrum L.P., Cellco Partnership
Length
1 page
Download Opinion (PDF)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

OF THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

TYLER DIVISION

ADAPTIX, INC. § v. § No. 6:12cv22

CONSOLIDATED CASE ALCATEL-LUCENT, INC., et al. §

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

The above case was referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge for pre-trial purposes in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636. The following motion is before the Court:

Defendants’ Motion to Strike Mr. Philip Green’s Supplemental Expert Report (Docket Entry # 463).

The Court, having reviewed the motion and the response, is of the opinion the motion should be DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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

Adaptix, Inc. v. Alcatel-Lucent USA, Inc. et al, No. 6:12-cv-00022 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 24, 2015).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-txed-6_12-cv-00022-1
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-txed-6_12-cv-00022-1

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