I/P Engine, Inc. v. AOL, Inc. et al

Filing 315

Memorandum in Support re 314 MOTION in Limine to Exclude Inadmissible Evidence filed by I/P Engine, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Proposed Order)(Sherwood, Jeffrey)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA NORFOLK DIVISION __________________________________________ ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) ) AOL, INC. et al., ) ) Defendants. ) __________________________________________) I/P ENGINE, INC., Civ. Action No. 2:11-cv-512 [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF I/P ENGINE, INC.’S FIRST MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE INADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE This Court, having considered Plaintiff I/P Engine, Inc.’s First Motion In Limine and accompanying Memorandum in Support thereof, and finding good cause exists, hereby ORDERS that the motion is GRANTED as follows: Defendants are hereby precluded from offering any evidence of, making reference to, or making suggestion of the following topics in the trial of this case: 1. the recently filed reexamination of U.S. Patent No. 6,314,420; 2. recent offers and other negotiations for, and the 2011 purchase price of, the patent portfolio that included the patents-in-suit; 3. the fee arrangement between I/P Engine and its counsel; 4. claim construction arguments that were not adopted by this Court; 5. claims that were previously included in this case but are no longer asserted, including claims against Google Search and defendants AOL and IAC’s Ask Sponsored Listings; DSMDB-3099863 6. derogatory, inflammatory, confusing and irrelevant terms such as “patent troll,” “shell corporation,” “paper patent” holder, or “non-practicing entity”; 7. any testimony or opinions about evidence or any other subject beyond the scope of the discussion and analysis in their expert report; 8. any reference to discussions or correspondence between counsel that did not go to the Court, including discovery disputes, negotiations, claims of privilege, or motions for relief sought but not granted; and 9. any reference to courtroom observers or jury consultants. So Ordered: Dated: September __, 2012 _________________________________ United States District Court Eastern District of Virginia 2 DSMDB-3099863

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?