Phenix Longhorn, LLC v. AU Optronics Corporation et al, No. 2:23-cv-00477 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 12, 2026)

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 Defendant AUO Corporation’s Opposed Motion to Strike Plaintiff Phenix’s Second Amended Infringement Contentions. Dkt. No. 205. The motion is fully briefed. See Dkt. Nos. 215, 224, 235. AUO argues that Phenix’s Second Amended Infringement Contentions (“SAIC”) should be stricken as untimely. See Dkt. No. 205 at 1. Having considered the briefing, for the reasons that follow , the Court finds that the Motion should be denied.