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-00310 (E.D. Tex. Feb. 16, 2021)

Granted in Part
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:19-cv-00310, Dkt. No. 190
Decided
February 16, 2021
Judge
Roy S. Payne, M.J.
Document
Memorandum Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM ORDER re 118 Opposed SEALED PATENT MOTION to Strike Portions of Mr. Friedman's Expert Report re Undisclosed Invalidity Opinions and Untimely Source Code Production filed by GREE, INC
Length
7 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 Plaintiff GREE, Inc.’s Motion to Strike Opinions Based on Undisclosed Invalidity Opinions and Untimely Source Code Production. Dkt. No. 118. After consideration, the Court GRANTS-IN-PART and DENIES-IN-PART the Motion. I. INTRODUCTION On September 16, 2019, GREE filed a complaint against Defendant Supercell Oy alleging Supercell’s Clash Royale product infringes U.S. Patent Nos. 10,076,708 (the “’708 Patent”) and 10,413,832 (the “’832 Patent”) (collectively, the “Asserted Patents”) . (Dkt. No. 1).