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

E.D. Tex.

Headwater Research LLC v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al, No. 2:23-cv-00103 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 9, 2025)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:23-cv-00103, Dkt. No. 376
Decided
April 9, 2025
Judge
Roy S. Payne, M.J.
Document
Memorandum Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM ORDER. The Court denies 181 Samsung's Daubert Motion and Motion to Strike Expert Report of Dr. Andreas Groehn
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.

Before the Court is Samsung’s Daubert Motion and Motion to Strike Expert Report of Dr. Andreas Groehn. Dkt. No. 181. For the reasons discussed below, the Court DENIES the Motion. I. LAW An expert witness may provide opinion testimony if “(a) the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue; (b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data; (c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods…