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
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?