Synopsys, Inc. v. Real Intent, Inc.

Filing 731

FURTHER ORDER REGARDING SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION IN LIMINE. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 10/16/2024. (ejdlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/16/2024)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

SAN JOSE DIVISION

7
SYNOPSYS, INC.,

8

Plaintiff,

9
v.

10

FURTHER ORDER REGARDING
SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION IN
LIMINE

REAL INTENT, INC.,

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No. 20-cv-02819-EJD

Defendant.

12
13

On October 15, 2024, the Court ordered Real Intent to submit the deposition excerpts it

14
15

sought to exclude. ECF No. 725. The Court received Real Intent’s deposition excerpts on

16

October 16, 2024 (ECF No. 726) and Synopsys’ response (ECF No. 727). After reviewing the

17

submitted excerpts, the identified exhibits, and the parties’ briefing, the Court rules as follows1:

18

I.

19

EXHIBIT A (ECF NO. 726)
Excerpt ID

20

2.16

21
2.60–64
2.65

22
23

2.66–68
2.74–77

24

Ruling

Reason

SUSTAINED

Not relevant; pertains only to liability. Risk of confusion in
raising liability.
OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance.
SUSTAINED Potential for prejudice or confusion outweighs relevance;
relates to resolved copyright claim.
OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance.
OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance.

25
26
27
28

1

This Order does not preclude Synopsys from later seeking to admit testimony or exhibits for
which the Court has sustained Real Intent’s objection, if appropriate. For example, if Real Intent
opens the door or for impeachment purposes.
Case No.: 20-cv-02819-EJD
FURTHER ORDER REGARDING SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION IN LIMINE
1

1
2

Excerpt ID
2.79–83
2.88

3
4

2.89–94

5

2.95
2.96–2.108

6
7
8

2.132–148

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

2.165–173
II.

Ruling

OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance.
SUSTAINED Not relevant; pertains only to liability. Risk of confusion in
raising liability.
SUSTAINED Potential for prejudice or confusion outweighs relevance;
relates to resolved copyright claim.
OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance; relates to timeline.
SUSTAINED Potential for jury to prejudicially view Real Intent’s efforts to
hide copying outweighs relevance. Efforts to hide primarily
go to liability because they show consciousness of guilt.
SUSTAINED Potential for jury to prejudicially view Real Intent’s efforts to
hide copying outweighs relevance. Efforts to hide primarily
go to liability because they show consciousness of guilt.
OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance; relates to timeline.

EXHIBIT B (ECF NO. 726)

Excerpt ID
21–24

Ruling
SUSTAINED

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

III.

41–51
52–53
57–58
61–63
64–74

24
25

75–80

26
27
28

81–84

Reason
Not relevant; pertains only to liability. Risk of confusion in
raising liability.

EXHIBIT C (ECF NO. 726)

Excerpt ID
12–22
23–32

Reason

Ruling

Reason

OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance; relates to timeline.
SUSTAINED Potential for prejudice or confusion outweighs relevance;
relates to resolved copyright claim.
OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance.
SUSTAINED Potential for prejudice or confusion outweighs relevance;
relates to resolved copyright claim.
OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance.
SUSTAINED Potential for prejudice or confusion outweighs relevance;
relates to resolved copyright claim.
SUSTAINED Potential for jury to prejudicially view Real Intent’s efforts to
hide copying outweighs relevance. Efforts to hide primarily
go to liability because they show consciousness of guilt.
SUSTAINED Potential for prejudice or confusion outweighs relevance;
relates to resolved copyright claim.
SUSTAINED Not relevant; pertains only to liability. Risk of confusion in

Case No.: 20-cv-02819-EJD
FURTHER ORDER REGARDING SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION IN LIMINE
2

1

Excerpt ID

Ruling

2
85–91

SUSTAINED

3
4
5

IV.

6
7
8
9

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

raising liability.
Potential for jury to prejudicially view Real Intent’s efforts to
hide copying outweighs relevance. Efforts to hide primarily
go to liability because they show consciousness of guilt.

EXHIBIT C (ECF NO. 709-1)
Excerpt

Entire
exhibit
V.

10

Reason

Ruling
SUSTAINED

Reason
Potential for prejudice or confusion outweighs relevance;
relates to resolved copyright claim.

EXHIBIT D (ECF NO. 709-1)
Excerpt

Sentence
beginning
“We should
ship…”
Remainder
of exhibit
VI.

Ruling
SUSTAINED

Reason
Potential for prejudice or confusion outweighs relevance;
relates to resolved copyright claim.

OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance.

EXHIBIT E (ECF NO. 709-1)
Excerpt

Entire
exhibit

VII.

Ruling
SUSTAINED

Reason
Potential for jury to prejudicially view Real Intent’s efforts to
hide copying outweighs relevance. Efforts to hide primarily
go to liability because they show consciousness of guilt.

EXHIBIT G (ECF NO. 709-1)

21
Excerpt

Ruling

Reason

22
23
24
25

p. 1
Remainder
of exhibit

OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance; relates to timeline.
SUSTAINED Potential for jury to prejudicially view Real Intent’s efforts to
hide copying outweighs relevance. Efforts to hide primarily
go to liability because they show consciousness of guilt.

26
27
28

Case No.: 20-cv-02819-EJD
FURTHER ORDER REGARDING SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION IN LIMINE
3

1

VIII. EXHIBIT H (ECF NO. 709-1)
Excerpt

2
3

Entire
exhibit

Ruling

Reason

OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance.

4
5

IX.

Excerpt

6
7
8
9

Entire
exhibit
X.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Ruling

Reason

OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance.

EXHIBIT J (ECF NO. 709-1)
Excerpt

10
11

EXHIBIT I (ECF NO. 709-1)

Entire
exhibit
XI.

Ruling
SUSTAINED

Reason
Potential for prejudice or confusion outweighs relevance;
relates to resolved copyright claim.

EXHIBIT K (ECF NO. 709-1)
Excerpt

Highlighted
excerpt
Remainder
of exhibit
XII.

Ruling

Reason

SUSTAINED

Not relevant; pertains only to liability. Risk of confusion in
raising liability.
OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance.

EXHIBIT L (ECF NO. 709-1)

19
20
21

Excerpt
Entire
exhibit

Ruling

Reason

OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance.

22
23
24
25
26

XIII. EXHIBIT M (ECF NO. 709-1)
Excerpt
Entire
exhibit

Ruling

Reason

OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance.

27
28

Case No.: 20-cv-02819-EJD
FURTHER ORDER REGARDING SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION IN LIMINE
4

1
2
3

XIV. EXHIBIT N (ECF NO. 709-1)
Excerpt
Entire
exhibit

Ruling

Reason

OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance.

4
5
6
7
8

United States District Court
Northern District of California

9

XV.

EXHIBIT O (ECF NO. 709-1)

Excerpt
Entire
exhibit

Excerpt

11

First
highlighted
sentence
Remainder
of exhibit
(including
second
highlighted
sentence)

13
14
15
16

Reason

OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance.

XVI. EXHIBIT P (ECF NO. 709-1)

10

12

Ruling

Ruling

Reason

SUSTAINED

Potential for jury to prejudicially view Real Intent’s efforts to
hide copying outweighs relevance. Efforts to hide primarily
go to liability because they show consciousness of guilt.
OVERRULED Prejudice does not outweigh relevance.

17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.

19
20

Dated: October 16, 2024

21
22
23

EDWARD J. DAVILA
United States District Judge

24
25
26
27
28

Case No.: 20-cv-02819-EJD
FURTHER ORDER REGARDING SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION IN LIMINE
5