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

E.D. Tex.

Vasu Holdings, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al, No. 2:24-cv-00034 (E.D. Tex. Feb. 1, 2026)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:24-cv-00034, Dkt. No. 260
Decided
February 1, 2026
Judge
Roy S. Payne, M.J.
Document
Memorandum Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM ORDER re 146 MOTION TO STRIKE EXPERT TESTIMONY OF DR. ERIC COLE filed by Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc.. (Motion(s)146 terminated)
Length
5 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 Testimony of Dr. Eric Cole. Dkt. No. 146. For the reasons discussed below, the Court is of the opinion that the Motion be DENIED. I. BACKGROUND Defendants seek to strike certain testimony of Plaintiff’s expert Dr. Eric Cole. Dr. Cole’s report is relevant to rebutting Defendants’ § 112 written description defense for three of the asserted patents, U.S. Patent Nos. 8,886,181 (“ the ʼ181 Patent”), 10,368,281 (“the ʼ281 Patent”) and 10,419,996 (“ the ʼ996 Patent”).