Function Media, L.L.C. v. Google, Inc. et al

Filing 380

ORDER setting forth ruling on motions in limine. The court DENIES these two motions in limine #46 and 48. Motion in limine No. 47 granted. Defendant Google, Inc.s motion in limine No. 1 is granted.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Charles Everingham on 1/15/10. (ehs, )

Function Media, L.L.C. v. Google, Inc. et al

Doc. 380

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION FUNCTION MEDIA, L.L.C. vs. GOOGLE, INC. and YAHOO!, INC. § § § § § § ORDER Pending before the court are the plaintiff Function Media, L.L.C.'s ("FM") motions in limine No. 46 (AdForce, Aaddzz, AdKnowledge, NetGravity, DoubleClick, AdStar, and AdManagerPro References as Prior Art) and No. 48 (Documents or Witnesses Not Timely Produced or Disclosed in Discovery) (Dkt. No. 188). The court DENIES these two motions in limine. Also pending is the plaintiff's motion in limine No. 47 (Evidence, Testimony, and Argument that the Inventors Drafted Patent Claims Based on Google's AdSense Product). That motion is GRANTED. Counsel shall approach the bench before referring to matters directly or indirectly covered by the motion in limine. The defendant Google, Inc.'s motion in limine No. 1 (Evidence and Argument Relating to the Parties' Conduct During Discovery) (Dkt. No. 206) is GRANTED. Questions and argument, such as that identified in FM's response­("Where is the document that shows X"), are permissible notwithstanding this order.
SIGNED this 15th day of January, 2010.

CASE NO. 2:07-CV-279-CE

___________________________________ CHARLES EVERINGHAM IV UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Dockets.Justia.com