WI-LAN Inc. v. Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. et al

Filing 353

Joint MOTION in Limine by Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc., Ericsson Inc., Exedea INC., HTC America, Inc., HTC Corporation, Sony Mobile Communications (USA) Inc., Sony Mobile Communications AB, Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, WI-LAN Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Pai, Ajeet)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION § § § § § § § § § § § WI-LAN INC., Plaintiff, v. ALCATEL-LUCENT USA INC.; et al. Defendants. Civil Action No. 6:10-cv-521-LED JURY TRIAL DEMANDED AGREED MOTIONS IN LIMINE Plaintiff Wi-LAN Inc. and Defendants Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc., Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, Ericsson Inc., Sony Mobile Communications AB, Sony Mobile Communications (USA) Inc., HTC Corporation, HTC America, Inc., and Exedea Inc. have agreed to the motions in limine as outlined below, and respectfully request that the Court enter an order granting them: 1. Reference to Motions in Limine: Any reference or testimony to the fact that Plaintiff or Defendants filed the instant motions in limine, or that the Court granted or denied any requested relief, except for references to the instant motions in limine to enforce compliance with the Court’s previous Orders. FED. R. EVID. 401-403. 2. Reference to Motions or Prior Rulings by this Court: Unless specifically authorized, any reference to any motion or brief filed by any party with this Court in this case, or ruling by this Court on any such motion, including but not limited to any discovery motion, sanctions motion, or dispositive motion, except for references to such motions or briefs to enforce compliance with the Court’s previous Orders. FED. R. EVID. 401-403. No 1 party is precluded from referencing, for the purposes of impeachment, any affidavits, declarations, or the like submitted with such motions or briefs. 3. References to Jury Consultants and/or Shadow Jurors: Any reference to any party’s use, if any, of jury consultants or jury study or focus groups to assist with trial preparation, jury selection, or trial. Such use is not relevant to any issue in this litigation. FED. R. EVID. 401-403. 4. References to Equitable Issues: Any reference to equitable defenses, including laches, unclean hands, equitable estoppel, and waiver, which are properly reserved for the Court and not the jury. FED. R. EVID. 401-403; see e.g., z4 Techs., Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., No. 6:06-CV-142 (Davis, J.), 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58374, at *60 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 18, 2006) (reserving issue of inequitable conduct to be heard outside the presence of the jury). No party is precluded from referencing facts that may be relevant to such equitable defenses to the extent they are also relevant to issues before the jury. 5. References to Arguments that Contradict the Court’s Orders, including the Court’s Markman Order: Unless specifically authorized, references to facts or arguments regarding any motion or brief on behalf of the parties that contradicts any of the Court’s rulings on any such motion, including the Court’s Markman Order, should be precluded, with the exception of references to such motions, arguments, or briefs to enforce compliance with the Court’s previous Orders. FED. R. EVID. 401-403. No party is precluded from referencing, for the purposes of impeachment, any affidavits, declarations, or the like submitted with such motions or briefs. 2 6. Derogatory Terms: Any references of either party using the derogatory terms “patent troll” and “lawsuit mill.”. Such statements would tend to confuse the jury, are irrelevant to the substantive issues, and be unfairly prejudicial. FED. R. EVID. 402, 403. 7. Reference to Acquisition of BelAir: Any reference, comment or statement by counsel, or by any witness, regarding LME’s acquisition of BelAir Networks Inc., any claim or defense of license as a result of that acquisition, or the co-pending arbitration proceedings regarding that matter. The Ericsson Defendants and Wi-LAN dispute whether Ericsson obtained a license to the patents-in-suit as a result of its acquisition of BelAir Networks Inc., a question committed to mandatory, binding arbitration in another forum. Because such issues are not before this jury, such evidence would both be irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial. FED. R. EVID. 401–403. 8. References to Law Firms or Lawyers Representing Any Party: With respect to any law firm representing any party in this lawsuit, any reference or testimony about the size of the law firm, other matters handled by the law firm or any of its lawyers, any disciplinary action or investigation into the law firm or lawyer representing any party, and the wealth of any attorney or law firm. FED. R. EVID. 401-403. 9. Reference to Jury Instructions and Verdict Form: Any reference to the instructions and verdict form ultimately submitted to the jury as Plaintiffs’ or Defendants’. FED. R. EVID. 401-403. The parties may refer to such instructions and verdict form as the Court’s instructions and the Court’s verdict form. 10. Reference to Fee Arrangements: Any reference to the fee arrangements between the parties and their attorneys or the attorneys’ fees paid by the parties to their 3 attorneys in the instant lawsuit, excepting any fee arrangements with or fees paid to expert or consulting witnesses, which are not before the jury. FED. R. EVID. 401-403 11. Objections to Discovery: To the extent previously resolved by the Court, objections made by any party to deposition notices, interrogatories, interrogatory answers, and deposition questions and testimony, except for references to objections to enforce compliance with the Court’s previous Orders, which the Court will rule on separately; the parties do not waive these objections but rather agree that the objections shall be maintained for the Court and need not be argued in front of the jury. 12. References to Clear and Convincing Standard of Proof in Texas Family Code: Any reference, comment, or statement by counsel, or by any witness called to testify, regarding the “clear and convincing” standard of proof contained in the Texas Family Code. FED. R. EVID. 401-403. 13. References to Foreign Business Entities: Any reference, comment, or statement by counsel, or by any witness called to testify, describing the “ethnicity” of the parties or their lawyers or any negative connotations based on a party being a foreign entity, including that the entity is, for example “Canadian” or “Taiwanese.” Such statements would be irrelevant to the substantive issues, are inflammatory, are improper, would tend to confuse the jury, and are more prejudicial than probative. This motion shall not prohibit references that any party has, for example, an office or employees located outside of the United States. FED. R. EVID. 401-403. 4 Dated: March 11, 2013 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Akshay S. Deoras (with permission) Gregory S. Arovas (pro hac vice) Robert A. Appleby (pro hac vice) Akshay S. Deoras (pro hac vice) Jeanne M. Heffernan (pro hac vice) KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 601 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Tel: (212) 446-4800 Fax: (212) 446-4900 Alcatel-Lucent-Wi-LANDefense@kirkland.com By: /s/ Ajeet P. Pai David B. Weaver (TX Bar No. 00798576) Lead Attorney Avelyn M. Ross (TX Bar No. 24027817) Ajeet P. Pai (TX Bar No. 24060376) Syed K. Fareed (TX Bar No. 24065216) Jeffrey T. Han (TX Bar No. 24069870) Janice Ta (TX Bar No. 24075138) Seth A. Lindner (TX Bar No. 24078862) VINSON & ELKINS LLP 2801 Via Fortuna, Suite 100 Austin, TX 78746 Tel: (512) 542-8400 Fax: (512) 236-3476 dweaver@velaw.com aross@velaw.com apai@velaw.com sfareed@velaw.com jhan@velaw.com jta@velaw.com slindner@velaw.com Local Counsel Michael E. Jones (TX Bar No. 10929400) Allen F. Gardner (TX Bar No. 24043679) John F. Bufe (TX Bar No. 03316930) POTTER MINTON PC 110 N. College, Suite 500 P.O. Box 359 Tyler, TX 75710-0359 Tel: (903) 597-8311 Fax: (903) 593-0846 mikejones@potterminton.com allengardner@potterminton.com johnbufe@potterminton.com Constance S. Huttner (NY Bar No. 1722024) VINSON & ELKINS LLP 666 5th Avenue, 26th Floor New York, NY 10103-0040 Tel: (212) 237-0040 Fax: (9l7) 849-5339 chuttner@velaw.com Attorneys for Defendant Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. /s/ Martin R. Bader (with permission) Stephen S. Korniczky (pro hac vice) Martin R. Bader (pro hac vice) Daniel N. Yannuzzi (pro hac vice) Lee Hsu (pro hac vice) Graham M. Buccigross (pro hac vice) SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP 12275 El Camino Real, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92130 Tel: (858) 720-8924 Fax: (858) 847-4892 LegalTm-WiLAN-Alcatel@sheppardmullin.com Steve R. Borgman (TX Bar No. 02670300) Gwendolyn J. Samora (TX Bar No. 00784899) VINSON &ELKINS LLP 1001 Fannin Street, Suite 2500 Houston, TX 77002-6760 Tel: (713) 758-2222 Fax: (713) 758-2346 sborgman@velaw.com gsamora@velaw.com Local Counsel Johnny Ward (TX Bar No. 00794818) 5 Local Counsel Eric Hugh Findlay (TX Bar No. 00789886) Brian Craft (TX Bar No. 04972020) FINDLAY CRAFT 6760 Old Jacksonville Hwy, Suite 101 Tyler, TX 75703 Tel: (903) 534-1100 Fax: (903) 534-1137 efindlay@findlaycraft.com bcraft@findlaycraft.com Wesley Hill (TX Bar No. 24032294) Claire Abernathy Henry (TX Bar No. 24053063) WARD & SMITH LAW FIRM P.O. Box 1231 1127 Judson Rd., Ste. 220 Longview, TX 75606-1231 Tel: (903) 757-6400 Fax: (903) 757-2323 jw@jwfirm.com wh@jwfirm.com claire@wsfirmcom Attorneys for Defendants HTC Corporation, HTC America, Inc., and Exedea Inc. Attorneys for Plaintiff, Wi-LAN Inc. /s/ Adrienne Dominguez (with permission) Bruce S. Sostek (TX Bar 18855700) Lead Attorney Richard L. Wynne, Jr. (TX Bar 24003214) Adrienne E. Dominguez (TX Bar 00793630) J. Michael Heinlen (TX Bar 24032287) Timothy E. Hudson (TX Bar 24046120) Justin S. Cohen (TX Bar 24078356) THOMPSON & KNIGHT LLP 1722 Routh Street, Suite 1500 Dallas, TX 75201 Tel: (214) 969-1700 Fax: (214) 969-1751 Ericsson-WI-LAN-Defense@tklaw.com Local Counsel William J. Cornelius (TX Bar 04834700) Jennifer Ainsworth (TX Bar 00784720) Wilson Robertson & Cornelius PC 909 ESE Loop 323, Suite 400 P.O. Box 7339 Tyler, TX 75711-7339 Tel: (903) 509-5000 Fax: (903) 509-5092 wc@wilsonlawfirm.com jainsworth@wilsonlawfirm.com Attorneys for Defendants Ericsson Inc., Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, Sony Mobile Communications (USA) Inc., and Sony Mobile Communications AB 6 CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE The undersigned certifies that Plaintiff Wi-LAN, Inc. has complied with the requirements of Local Rule CV-7(h), and no party opposes the relief sought herein. Ajeet P. Pai Ajeet P. Pai CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was filed electronically in compliance with Local Rule CV-5(a). As such, this document was served on all counsel who are deemed to have consented to electronic service on March 11, 2013. Ajeet P. Pai Ajeet P. Pai 7

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?