Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Bel Fuse Inc. et al

Filing 384

ORDER that Defendants Motion In Limine No. 3 352 is DENIED without prejudice to Defendant to reassert their objections at such time as Plaintiff offers the materials in question. Signed by Judge Philip M. Pro on 10/26/12. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 *** 6 HALO ELECTRONICS, INC., 7 Plaintiff, 8 vs. 9 PULSE ENGINEERING, INC., et al., 10 Defendants. 11 12 13 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2:07-CV-00331-PMP-PAL ORDER Having read and considered Defendant’s fully briefed Motion in Limine 14 No. 3 to Preclude Plaintiff From Using Unverified Testimony and Unauthenticated 15 Documents From a Different Litigation at Trial (Doc. #352), and the arguments of 16 counsel presented at the hearing conducted October 1, 2012, and finding that the 17 Exhibits in question are potentially appropriate for use as impeachment evidence in 18 the event Mr. Luk or Mr. Imburgia testify in person, or via video deposition, and 19 good cause appearing, 20 IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion In Limine No. 3 (Doc. #352) is 21 DENIED without prejudice to Defendant to reassert their objections at such time as 22 Plaintiff offers the materials in question. 23 DATED: October 26, 2012. 24 25 26 PHILIP M. PRO United States District Judge

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?