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

E.D. Tex.

Music Choice v. Stingray Digital Group Inc., No. 2:16-cv-00586 (E.D. Tex. Nov. 5, 2019)

Granted in Part
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:16-cv-00586, Dkt. No. 292
Decided
November 5, 2019
Judge
Roy S. Payne, M.J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re 188 SEALED MOTION Music Choice's Daubert Motion to Strike Deposition Testimony of Defendants' Expert Dr. Michael Shamos, for Presenting Untimely and Undisclosed Opinions filed by Music Choice, 230 SEALED MOTI…
Length
6 pages

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.

Before the Court is (1) Plaintiff Music Choice’s Daubert Motion to Strike Deposition Testimony of Defendants’ Expert Dr. Michael Shamos for Presenting Untimely and Undisclosed Opinions (“Motion to St rike”) (Dkt. No. 188) and (2) Music Choice’s Alternative Motion for Leave to Serve the Supplemental Expert Report of Samuel Russ, Ph.D (“Motion for Leave”) (Dkt. No. 230). Music Choice raises two separate arguments within its Motion to Strike. Music Choice first seeks to exclude Dr.