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. Apr. 28, 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. 260
Decided
April 28, 2021
Judge
Roy S. Payne, M.J.
Document
Memorandum Order
Length
17 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 four issues raised during the April 23, 2021 final pretrial conference for the above -captioned matters and two pending motions.1 The first motion is Plaintiff GREE, Inc.’s Motion to Exclude and Motion in Limine Regarding Defendant Supercell Oy’s Untimely Non-Infringing Alternative (“Motion to Exclude”). GREE, Inc. v. Supercell Oy , 2:19-cv-00310- JRG-RSP, Dkt. No. 244 . The second motion is GREEs Motion for Clarification Regarding GREE’s Motion in Limine No.