Ameranth, Inc. v. Menusoft Systems Corporation et al, No. 2:07-cv-00271 (E.D. Tex. May 26, 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.

Pending before the court is plaintiff Ameranth, Inc.’s (“Ameranth” or “Plaintiff”) motion for new trial (Dkt. No. 283). Ameranth argues that it is entitled to a new trial because the jury was tainted when it improperly considered the Defendants’ invalidity expert’s report as substantive evidence. Having carefully consider ed the parties’ arguments, the court DENIES Ameranth’s motion for new trial. I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND This case was tried to a jury over five days in September 2010.