Bungie Inc v. Aimjunkies.com et al

Filing 242

MINUTE ORDER. Plaintiff's 199 Motion to Strike the Expert Testimony of Brad LaPorte is DENIED in part, GRANTED in part, and DEFERRED in part. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (MJV)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 6 7 BUNGIE, INC., 8 9 10 Plaintiff, C21-0811 TSZ v. AIMJUNKIES.COM, et al., 11 MINUTE ORDER Defendants. 12 The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable 13 Thomas S. Zilly, United States District Judge. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 (1) Plaintiff’s motion to strike the expert testimony of Brad LaPorte, docket no. 199, is DENIED in part, GRANTED in part, and DEFERRED in part, as follows: (a) The motion is DENIED, in part, as to Plaintiff’s arguments that LaPorte’s testimony should be excluded because he lacks methodology or analysis concerning his tendered testimony. Plaintiff’s objections go to the weight and not the admissibility of LaPorte’s testimony and can be adequately tested during cross-examination. (b) The motion is GRANTED, in part, because, as stated in the Court’s prior Minute Order, docket no. 180, LaPorte’s opinion shall be limited to Defendants’ previous expert’s (Scott Kraemer’s) June 12, 2023, Expert Report and June 23, 2023, deposition testimony. The motion is further GRANTED, in part, and LaPorte will be precluded from offering rebuttal testimony to Plaintiff’s expert Steven Guris. Defendants never disclosed that any expert would rebut or address Guris’s testimony or report. See Mann Decl. at ¶¶ 5–6 (docket no. 137 at 2); see also LaPorte Expert Report (docket no. 200-2) (scope of engagement and summary of opinions). 23 MINUTE ORDER - 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 (c) The Court DEFERS to the Pretrial Conference the issue of whether LaPorte has any relevant testimony to present in connection with May’s remaining counterclaim given LaPorte’s deposition testimony. See LaPorte Dep. Tr. (docket no. 200-3). LaPorte was not asked to provide any opinions and his report does not mention any technological measures May claims to have employed, or whether or how Plaintiff purportedly circumvented those measures. See LaPorte Expert Report (docket no. 200-2). (2) record. The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Minute Order to all counsel of Dated this 15th day of November, 2023. 7 Ravi Subramanian Clerk 8 9 s/Laurie Cuaresma Deputy Clerk 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 MINUTE ORDER - 2

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?