Polaris IP, LLC v. Google Inc. et al

Filing 527

MOTION to Strike /Exclude Expert Testimony from Dr. L. Karl Branting Regarding Written Description Under Daubert and Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence by Bright Response LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit of Elizabeth Wiley, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Text of Proposed Order)(Wiley, Elizabeth)

Polaris IP, LLC v. Google Inc. et al

Doc. 527 Att. 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION BRIGHT RESPONSE, LLC, Plaintiff, v. GOOGLE INC., et al., Defendants. § § § § § § § § § Civil Action No. 2:07-cv-371-CE JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

PROPOSED ORDER GRANTING BRIGHT RESPONSE, LLC'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE EXPERT TESTIMONY FROM DR. L. KARL BRANTING REGARDING WRITTEN DESCRIPTION UNDER DAUBERT AND RULE 702 OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE On this date, the Court considered Bright Response, LLC's Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony From Dr. L. Karl Branting Regarding Written Description Under Daubert And Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Having considered the parties' respective positions and arguments regarding the motion, the Court finds that the motion should be GRANTED. It is therefore ordered that paragraphs 276 and 277 of Dr. Branting's expert report shall be stricken and Dr. Branting may not opine regarding the sufficiency of the written description of the '947 patent.

PO MTS Branting.doc

1
Dockets.Justia.com