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)

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