LaserDynamics, Inc. v. Asus Computer International et al, No. 2:06-cv-00348 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 20, 2011)

From the Opinion

The passage below is extracted verbatim from the opening of the document. It has not been editorially summarized — consult the full opinion for the court's complete reasoning.

I. INTRODUCTION Pending before the court is plaintiff LaserD ynamics, Inc.’s (“Laser”) motion to exclude the expert reports and corresponding trial test imony of defendant Quanta Computer, Inc.’s (“Quanta”) expert, Richard G. Zech (Dkt. No. 667). Laser contends that Dr. Zech’s opinions are flawed, irrelevant, and unreliabl e and therefore should be strick en. For the reasons discussed below, the court GRANTS-in-part and DENIES-in- part Laser’s motion to strike Dr. Zech’s expert reports. The motion is GRANTED as to: (1) Dr.