Trustees of Boston University v. Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd. et al
Filing
1476
Chief Judge Patti B. Saris: ORDER entered re 1364 MOTION for Order. After hearing and a review of the submissions, I will structure trial as detailed below: 1. The actions against all three defendants will be tried beginning on November 2, 2015, at 9:00 a.m. The jury will hear evidence as to infringement, validity, and certain theories of damages. However, the court will not consider the design win theory of damages at this trial. BU may present its direct infringement theory of damages, and its induced infringement theory insofar as these theories do not implicate design win evidence. Resolution of the design win issue will be deferred. If BU prevails on infringement and validity, the Court will conduct a Daubert hearing as to design win, and, if the theory survives, impanel a second jury. 2. Each side will have sixteen (16) hours to present its case, including opening statements and closing arguments. Counsel shall appear in court at 8:30 each morning when the court will hear objections to the days exhibits. The parties sh all exchange exhibits two business days before a witness is scheduled to take the stand at trial. Furthermore, counsel shall confer to minimize any objections to deposition transcript testimony. Counsel shall present all unresolved objections to the Court three business days before the evidence is set to be introduced at trial. 3. Counsel shall submit proposed verdict forms by October 28, 2015. See Complete Order for Details. (Geraldino-Karasek, Clarilde)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
_______________________________
)
TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY, )
Plaintiff,
)
) Consolidated Civil Action No.
v.
) 12-11935-PBS
)
EVERLIGHT ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,)
et al.,
)
Defendants.
)
)
)
TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY, )
Plaintiff,
)
) Civil Action No. 12-12326-PBS
v.
)
)
EPISTAR CORPORATION, et al.,
)
Defendants.
)
)
)
TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY, )
Plaintiff,
)
) Civil Action No. 12-12330-PBS
v.
)
)
LITE-ON INC., et al.,
)
Defendants.
)
)
ORDER
October 19, 2015
Saris, C.J.
Plaintiff Trustees of Boston University (BU) has filed suit
against Defendants Epistar Corporation, Everlight Electronics
Co., Ltd., and Lite-On Inc., alleging infringement of U.S.
Patent No. 5,686,738. Defendants have moved to bifurcate the
trial as between Epistar and its two “trailing customer
1
defendants,” Everlight and Lite-On (Docket No. 1364). BU
opposes, seeking a single unified trial against all three
defendants (Docket No. 1381). After hearing and a review of the
submissions, I will structure trial as detailed below.
1.
The actions against all three defendants will be tried
beginning on November 2, 2015, at 9:00 a.m. The jury will hear
evidence as to infringement, validity, and certain theories of
damages. However, the court will not consider the “design win”
theory of damages at this trial. BU may present its direct
infringement theory of damages, and its induced infringement
theory insofar as these theories do not implicate design win
evidence. Resolution of the design win issue will be deferred.
If BU prevails on infringement and validity, the Court will
conduct a Daubert hearing as to design win, and, if the theory
survives, impanel a second jury.
2.
Each side will have sixteen (16) hours to present its
case, including opening statements and closing arguments.
Counsel shall appear in court at 8:30 each morning when the
court will hear objections to the day’s exhibits. The parties
shall exchange exhibits two business days before a witness is
scheduled to take the stand at trial. Furthermore, counsel shall
confer to minimize any objections to deposition transcript
testimony. Counsel shall present all unresolved objections to
2
the Court three business days before the evidence is set to be
introduced at trial.
3.
Counsel shall submit proposed verdict forms by October
28, 2015.
/s/ PATTI B. SARIS
Patti B. Saris
Chief United States District Judge
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?