`
`Washington, DC.
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN DIGITAL VIDEO
`
`Inv. N0. 337-TA-1158
`
`
`
`
`
`RECEIVERS, BROADBAND
`
`GATEWAYS, AND RELATED
`HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE
`
`
`
`' COMPONENTS
`
`
`RDER NO. 26:
`
`' O
`
`ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS IN LIMINE AND
`HIGH PRIORITY OBJECTIONS, AND TELEPHONE
`MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SCHEDULE
`
`(December 18, 2019)
`
`Motions in Limine and High Priority Objections are not suitable vehicles: (1) as
`
`substitutes for Motions for Summary Determination; or (2) to attempt to strike or restrict what is
`
`clearly admissible testimony. Neither should Motions in Liim'ne be used for such inappropriate
`
`purposes as to ask that the other parties not violate orders, such as Markman constructions, when
`
`all parties should know not to Violate rules. Similarly, if a burden of proof is in doubt because of
`
`testimony, kindly leave that to post-hearing briefing.
`
`The Complainants as a group and the Respondents as a group each will be allowed no
`more than a total ofthree (3) Motions in Limine (“MIL”) and High Priority Objections (“HPO”)
`
`' combined. Therefore, by close ofbusineSS‘On December 23,- 2019, the Complainants as a group
`
`and the Respondents as a group should each choose the three (3) they would like considered.
`
`The remainder should be withdrawn.
`
`’V
`
`I will hold a Telephone Conference on January 14, 2019 at 2:00 pm. to give the Parties
`
`decisions on the Motions in Limine or High Priority Objections that remain. If I have not
`
`Page 1 of 2
`
`
`
`arranged an earlier telephone conference, or the Markman Order is not complete, I will also issue
`
`the Markman constructions in that Telephone Conference.
`
`Please be advised that because Motibns to Strike have been used and abused too
`
`frequently, I will be limiting those as well. During the evidentiary hearing (“Hearing”) the
`
`Parties will be expected to know very well the testimony of their own and the other party’s
`
`experts, and the citations to reports and deposition testimony if they claim that testimony was
`
`changed or opinions are “beyond the scope” of earlier testimony. or opinions. Frivolous motions
`
`will be considered those where the party claiming objection cannot support the objection with
`
`clear, complete citations that are not simply a partial explanation that elides .or attempts to
`
`obfuscate or mischaracterize the complete testimony or opinion that was, in fact, given.
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`
`
`Page 2 of 2
`
`
`
`CERTAIN DIGITAL VIDEO RECEIVERS, BROADBAND
`GATEWAYS, AND RELATED HARDWARE AND
`SOFTWARE COMPONENTS
`
`‘
`
`Inv. N0. 337-TA-1158
`
`PUBLIC CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`1, Lisa R. Barton, hereby certify that the attached 'ORDER has been served by hand upon
`the Commission Investigative Attorney, Cortney Hoecherl, Esq., and the following parties as
`indicated, on December 18, 2019.
`
`
`
`Lisa R. Barton, Secretary
`US. International Trade Commission
`
`500 E Street, SW, Room 112
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`On Behalf of Comglainants Rovi Corgoration and Rovi
`Guides, Inc.:
`
`Douglas A. Cawley, Esq.
`MCKOOL SMITH, P~C-
`300 Crescent Court, Suite 1500
`Dallas, TX 75201
`
`.
`
`CI Via Hand Delivery
`D Via Express Delivery
`‘ ‘1 Via First Class Mail
`[:1 Other:
`
`On Behalf of Resgondents Comcast Corgoration, Comcast
`Cable Communications, LLC, Comcast Cable
`Communications Management, LLC, and Comcast Holding5
`Corgoration
`
`Bert C. Reiser, Esq.
`LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
`555 Eleventh Street, NW.
`»
`Suite 1000
`Washington, DC 20004
`
`.'
`
`'
`
`,
`
`'
`
`g
`
`El Via Hand Delivery
`[:3 Via Express Delivery
`Via First Class Mail
`510ther:
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
