WI-LAN Inc. v. Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. et al
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Leonard Davis: Final Pretrial Conference held on 6/25/2013. (Court Reporter Shea Sloan.) (Attachments: # 1 Attorney Sign In Sheets) (rlf)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
June 25, 2013
Court Reporter: Shea Sloan
Courtroom Deputy: Rosa Ferguson
Law Clerk: Josue Caballero
Chief Staff Attorney: Nicole Mitchell
CIVIL ACTION NO: 6:10cv521
ALCATEL-LUCENT USA, INC., ET AL.
CIVIL ACTION NO: 6:13cv252
HTC CORPORATION, ET AL.
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
SEE SIGN-IN SHEETS
On this day, came the parties by their attorneys and the following proceedings were had:
OPEN: 9:00 AM
ADJOURN: 11:55 AM
9:00 AM Case called. Parties announced ready.
Court addressed the parties on the pretrial matters. Court will begin with Alcatel-Lucent and
HTC’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Invalidity of Claims 1, 3, and 4 of Patents ’326
and ’211 (Dkt #347).
Mr. Arovas addressed the Court on reduction on number of claims and the MSJ is now moot.
As to Docket No. 347, Court denied as moot. Court will move on to the Daubert Motion re
Ms. Heffernan presented Alcatel-Lucent, HTC and Son Mobile’s Daubert Motion to
Exclude the Report and Testimony of John C. Jarosz Regarding Issues Related to
Damages (Dkt #337).
Ms. Samora responded as to the entire market value rule portion of the Daubert Motion.
Ms. Heffernan replied and continued to present argument on Daubert Motion. Mr. Weaver
addressed the Court on sealing the courtroom on the license. Court sealed the courtroom.
SEALED PROCEEDINGS. Court addressed the parties regarding concerns on redacted and
sealed court proceedings.
Ms. Heffernan continued her argument. Ms. Samora responded as to the license. Ms.
Heffernan replied. Ms. Samora further replied.
Court UNSEALED the courtroom.
Ms. Heffernan continued her presentation of Motion and discussed Defendants’ MIL No. 3
(None-Comparable Licenses) [Dkt #354].
Mr. Pai responded
Court in recess for 10 minutes.
Ms. Heffernan continued her argument on the Daubert Motion.
Mr. Pai responded. Court inquired as to damages from each defendant based on damage
module. Mr. Pai responded and gave the numbers. Mr. Weaver addressed the Court on the
lump sums through trial. Mr. Pai responded as to the other numbers.
Ms. Heffernan continued to address the Court on the second part of the Daubert Motion and
MIL 5. Court interrupted and went back to the lump-sum calculations on world-wide sales.
Ms. Heffernan responded. Mr. Pai replied as to the US revenues.
Ms. Heffernan continued with the Daubert motion. Ms. Samora responded.
Ms. Heffernan continued with the third part of the Daubert motion.
Mr. Weaver responded. Ms. Heffernan replied. Mr. Weaver further responded. Ms.
Heffernan further replied. Court inquired as to the marking issue. Mr. Weaver responded as
to a factual issue. Ms. Heffernan responded. Mr. Weaver further responded. Mr. Arovas
responded. Court will take this motion under advisement.
Court addressed the parties on Motions in Limine.
Mr. Weaver addressed the Court and the parties are working together. Court asked for the
ones that the parties wanted the Court to hear. Mr. Weaver presented MIL 1. Mr. Arovas
Mr. Pai addressed the Court on MIL 5. Ms. Heffernan responded. Court inquired on the
standard setting. Wi-Lan’s MIL 5 is denied.
Mr. Hill addressed the Court on MIL 8 and 9. Mr. Arovas responded. Mr. Hill replied.
Court denied as to the invalidity (MIL #8). Mr. Hill addressed the Court on MIL 9. Mr.
Arovas responded. Court denied MIL #9.
Ms. Heffernan addressed the Court on Defendant’s MIL 1. Ms. Samora responded. Court
will rule at same time as Daubert Motion. Ms. Heffernan further addressed the Court.
Ms. Samora responded.
Ms. Heffernan presented MIL 4 and rests on the briefs.
Mr. Arovas addressed the Court on MIL 7 and parties to meet and confer.
Mr. Arovas addressed the Court on trial times. Mr. Hill responded as to the trial times. Court
asked about experts. Mr. Arovas responded. Mr. Hill responded.
Court inquired as to this being a standards case. Mr. Arovas responded.
Court addressed the parties on doing opening statements on jury selection day.
addressed the parties and Court may need to work on Friday to get this case concluded.
Court inquired as to mediation. Mr. Weaver responded.
Mr. Hill addressed the Court on substituting a Defendants’ witness on the witness list and
deposing the new witness. By agreement, the Court will allow.
Mr. Arovas addressed the Court on the Joint Agreed Jury questionnaire. Court approved.
There being nothing further, Court adjourned.
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?