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

E.D. Tex.

Wireless Alliance, LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC et al, No. 2:23-cv-00095 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 29, 2024)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:23-cv-00095, Dkt. No. 255
Decided
October 29, 2024
Judge
Roy S. Payne, M.J.
Document
Memorandum Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM ORDER re 100 SEALED MOTION to Disqualify Dr. Jon Putnam filed by Ericsson Inc. (Motion(s)100 terminated)
Length
3 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 Disqualify Plaintiff’s Expert, Dr. Jon Putnam filed by Intervenor Ericsson Inc. Dkt. No. 100. For the reasons discussed below , the Court DENIES the Motion. Ericsson presents two separate bases for disqualification. First, they argue that Dr. Putnam’s contract prohibits him from “working adverse to Ericsson,” and second that the Koch v. Boudreaux factors are met. Id. at 3.