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

E.D. Tex.

GREE, Inc v. Supercell Oy, No. 2:19-cv-00070 (E.D. Tex. July 20, 2020)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:19-cv-00070, Dkt. No. 344
Decided
July 20, 2020
Judge
Roy S. Payne, M.J.
Document
Memorandum Order
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 are motions in both cases entitled Motion to Strike the Portion of the Report of GREE, Inc.’s Damages Expert Regarding Conversations Concerning Undisclosed Information About GREE’s Views of the Parties’ Prior License (“Motions”), filed by Defendant Supercell Oy (“Supercell”). Dkt. No. 204 in Case No. 2:19-cv-00070-JRG-RSP (“the -70 case”) and Dkt. No. 185 in Case No. 2:19-cv-00071-JRG-RSP (“the -71 case”). After consideration, the Court DENIES both Motions. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff GREE, Inc.