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

E.D. Tex.

CXT Systems, Inc. v. Academy, Ltd., d/b/a Academy Sports + Outdoors, No. 2:18-cv-00171 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 28, 2020)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:18-cv-00171, Dkt. No. 427
Decided
January 28, 2020
Judge
Roy S. Payne, M.J.
Document
Memorandum Order
Length
10 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 the Motion to Exclude the Expert Testimony of CXT Systems , Inc.’s Damages Expert David A. Haas (the “Motion”), filed by Defendant J. C. Penney Company, Inc. (“JCP”). (Dkt. No. 283 ). In the Motion, JCP argues that th e Court should strike Mr. Haas’ testimony in its entirety because it depends on unreliable sources of information and methods to calculate the proposed royalty rate. Having considered the briefing on the Motion and Mr. Haas’ report, the Court DENIES the Motion. I.