Tinnus Enterprises, LLC et al v. Telebrands Corporation et al, No. 6:15-cv-00551 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 3, 2019)

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 Defendants ’ Telebrands Corporation (“Telebrands”), Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. (“Bed Bath”), and Bulbhead.com LLC (“Bulbhead”) (collectively “Defendants”) Motion to Exclude Plaintiffs’ expert Alan Ratliff’s Opinion on Damages. (Doc. No. 419.) Plaintiffs Tinnus Enterprises, ZURU Ltd., ZURU Inc., ZURU LLC, ZURU PTY Ltd., and ZURU UK Ltd. (collectively “Plaintiffs”) filed a response (Doc. No. 434), to which Defendants filed a reply (Doc. No. 452). For the reasons stated herein, Defendants’ Motion (Doc. No. 419) is DENIED.