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

E.D. Tex.

SK nexilis Co., Ltd. v. Solus Advanced Materials Co., Ltd. et al, No. 2:23-cv-00539 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 7, 2026)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:23-cv-00539, Dkt. No. 362
Decided
April 7, 2026
Judge
Roy S. Payne, M.J.
Document
Memorandum Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM ORDER re 147 Motion to Exclude the Opinions and Testimony of Dr. Craig Arnold; 271 Motion to Exclude the Supplemental Opinions and Testimony of Dr. Craig Arnold; 331 Defendants Motion to Strike Portions of SKNs Draft Testing Exhi…
Length
13 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 Plaintiff SKN’s Motion to Exclude the Opinions and Testimony of Dr. Craig Arnold (“Original Motion”), Dkt. No. 147, Motion to Exclude the Supplemental Opinions and Testimony of Dr. Craig Arnold (“Supplemental Motion”), Dkt. No. 271, and Defendants’ Motion to Strike Portions of SKN’s Draft Testing Exhibit PTX-23 That Contain Tests That Were Not Included in Any Expert Report (“Testing Motion”), Dkt. No. 331. The Original Motion is fully briefed, Dkt. Nos. 184, 200, 217, as is the Supplemental Motion, Dkt. Nos. 280, 285, 291.