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

E.D. Tex.

Mojo Mobility Inc v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, et al, No. 2:22-cv-00398 (E.D. Tex. July 22, 2024)

Granted in Part
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:22-cv-00398, Dkt. No. 247
Decided
July 22, 2024
Judge
Roy S. Payne, M.J.
Document
Memorandum Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM ORDER re 87 SEALED MOTION to Strike and Exclude the Expert Report and Testimony of David Baarman as Untimely and Unreliable filed by Mojo Mobility Inc. (Motion(s)87 terminated)
Length
11 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 Strike and Exclude the Expert Report and Testimony of David Baarman filed by Mojo Mobility, Inc. Dkt. No. 87; Dkt. No. 138 (reply in support). Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. opposed the Motion with a response and sur -reply. Dkt. No. 109; Dkt. No. 162. For the reasons discussed below, Mojo’s Motion is GRANTED to the limited extent provided below. I.