Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Syneron Med. Ltd. v. Invasix, Inc.

United States District Court for the Central District of California, Southern Division

August 27, 2018, Decided; August 27, 2018, Filed; September 5, 2018, Filed

Case No: 8:16-cv-00143-DOC-KES

Opinion

JAMS Ref No: 1220057351

SPECIAL MASTER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION THAT: 1) DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STRIKE THE REPORT AND TESTIMONY OF ROY WEINSTEIN BE GRANTED; 2) DEFENDANTS' [*2]  MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF ROY WEINSTEIN'S EXPERT REPORT BE DENIED; AND 3) PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STRIKE THE EXPERT REPORT AND TESTIMONY OF W. CHRISTOPHER BAKE WLL BE DENIED AS MOOT

INTRODUCTION

Pending before the Special Master are motions to exclude expert testimony pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 702 and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S. Ct. 2786, 125 L. Ed. 2d 469 (1993), filed by plaintiff, Syncron Medical Ltd. ("Syneron"), and defendants, Invasix, Inc. and Inmode MD Ltd. ("Invasix"). Invasix seeks to exclude the testimony of Syneron's damages expert Roy Weinstein and strike his expert report. (D.I. 109 and 112.) Syneron seeks to exclude the testimony of Invasix's rebuttal damages expert W. Christopher Bakewell and strike his rebuttal damages report. (D.I. 102.) A hearing on these matters was held on March 27, 2018. For the reasons discussed below, the Special Master finds that certain fundamental and integral aspects of Mr. Weinstein's damages opinions are so inherently and patently flawed that an exclusion of his entire damages testimony is warranted.1 Accordingly, the Special Master recommends granting Invasix's Motion To Strike the expert report of Roy Weinstein (D.I. 109), denying Invasix's Motion To Strike portions of Mr. Weinstein's expert report pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P 37(c) (D.I. [*3]  112), and denying Syneron's Motion To Strike the expert report of Mr. Bakewell (D.I. 102) as moot.

LEGAL STANDARDS

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

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

2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220514 *

SYNERON MEDICAL LTD., Plaintiff, vs. INVASIX, INC. and INMODE MD LTD., Defendant's.

Subsequent History: Adopted by, Motion granted by, Motion denied by, Motion denied by, As moot Syneron Med. Ltd. v. Invasix, Inc., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220505 (C.D. Cal., Sept. 28, 2018)

Prior History: Syneron Med. Ltd. v. Invasix, Inc., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152333 (C.D. Cal., Aug. 24, 2018)

CORE TERMS

patent, negotiation, royalty, licenses, infringement, hypothetical, calculation, platforms, apportionment, patentee, technological, apportion, Settlement, rebuttal, eMatrix, wisdom, patents-in-suit, non-infringing, hypothesized, unreliable, discovery, invention, quotation, reliable, multi-component, competitors, licensor, stricken, moot, post-infringement