Patent Case Watch

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-00237 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 29, 2021)

Adopted in Part Report and recommendation adopted with modification
Summary Judgment Motion to Strike Daubert / Expert Challenges § 101 Eligibility
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:19-cv-00237, Dkt. No. 253
Decided
April 29, 2021
Judge
Rodney Gilstrap, J.
Document
Order
Docket Entry
ORDER ADOPTING the following orders and reports of the Magistrate Judge:
Length
4 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.

Currently before the Court are Objections filed by the parties to the following orders and reports of the Magistrate Judge: I. OBJECTIONS AT DKT. NO. 228 Defendant Supercell Oy previously filed a Motion to Strike to Preclude GREE, Inc.’s Technical Expert, Dr. Robert Akl From Offering Undisclosed and Improper Opinions Regarding Claim Construction. (Dkt. No. 143.) Magistrate Judge Payne entered a Memorandum Order denying the motion. (Dkt. No. 215.) Supercell has now filed Objections (Dkt. No. 228), with Plaintiff GREE, Inc. filing a Response (Dkt. No.

Download Opinion (PDF)

Source: govinfo.gov USCOURTS collection · retrieved July 23, 2026 · Report an error

Other documents in this case