Paice LLC v. Hyundai Motor Co.

Paice LLC v. Hyundai Motor Co.

Opinion

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: MOTIONS IN LIMINE

The Court has before it Plaintiffs' Motions In Limine [ECF No. 634], Defendants' Motions In Limine [ECF No. 636] and the materials submitted by the parties relating thereto. The Court has held a hearing and has had the benefit of the arguments of counsel.

As set forth herein:

• Plaintiffs' Motions In Limine [ECF No. 634] are GRANTED IN PART.

• Defendants' Motions [*4]  In Limine [ECF No. 636] are GRANTED IN PART.

• Certain Motions In Limine remain pending.

I. PLAINTIFFS' MOTIONS IN LIMINE

1. Preclude Hyundai from referring to Paice or Abell as a "troll," "NPE," "patent pirate," or similar pejorative.

GRANTED.

Defendants shall, as will Plaintiffs, refer to Paice as a "technology company" that develops technology, seeks to obtain patents to license to other companies to use in manufacturing products, but that Paice does not itself manufacture or sell any products.

If Plaintiffs request, I will consider an instruction to the effect that there are some companies that abuse patent rights but that all concerned parties agree that Paice is not one of those.

Absent a ruling, on the record, in advance, Defendants shall not refer to the fact (if it is a fact) that Paice has not developed new technology after that included in the patents at issue.

2. Preclude Hyundai from presenting any argument, evidence, or testimony disparaging the Patent Office or patent examiners.

GRANTED IN PART.

Any argument, evidence, or testimony regarding the Patent Office or patent examiners shall refer to a precise quotation of a statement made by Judge Fogel in the Federal Judicial Center [*5]  video being shown to the jury.

3. Exclude reference to any arrangements—contingent fee or otherwise—to pay attorneys' fees.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.