`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
`
`
`
`
`
`14cv0111
`ELECTRONICALLY FILED
`
`DRONE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`PARROT S.A., PARROT, INC.,
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`ORDER OF COURT RE: OBJECTIONS TO AUTHENTICITY AND/OR
`ADMISSIBILITY CONTAINED WITHIN JOINT EXHIBIT LIST CHART
`(DOC. NO. 301)
`
`Presently before this Court are evidentiary objections, pursuant to the Federal Rules of
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Evidence, which are contained within a Joint Exhibit List Chart. Doc. No. 301. The Court has
`
`been provided with copies of the exhibits, enabling the Court to rule on the Parties’ objections.
`
`
`
`AND NOW, this 20th day of April, 2015, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
`
`1. Defendants’ objections to the following Plaintiff’s exhibits are SUSTAINED:
`
`A. P-19-P-20; and
`
`B. P-6, P6-1-P6-10 (Plaintiff may use these exhibits with the expert witness to refresh
`
`his recollection and may use P6-3-P6-10 for demonstrative purposes).
`
`
`
`2. Defendants’ objections to the following Plaintiff’s exhibits are OVERRULED:
`
`A. P-4, P-5;
`
`B. P-21-P-23; and
`
`C. P-27-P-30, P-32-P-35, P-38-P-45, P-47, P-51, P-55, P-57-P-58, P-60-P-61, P-78, P-
`
`94-P-97, P-107, P-112, P-115, P-117-P-118, P-120, P-124-P-128.
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:14-cv-00111-AJS Document 314 Filed 04/20/15 Page 2 of 4
`
`3. Plaintiff’s objections to the following Defendants’ exhibits are SUSTAINED:
`
`A. D-1-D-15 (Defendants may use these exhibits with the expert witness to refresh his
`
`recollection and may use D-5-D-15 for demonstrative purposes);
`
`B. D-104-D-108 (based upon the Court’s prior ruling that Defendants are precluded
`
`from presenting evidence or argument related to the inter partes review, Doc. No.
`
`287, ¶ 3. However, Defendants may present these documents if they are sufficiently
`
`redacted or presented in a way such that the jury will not be aware of the inter partes
`
`review);
`
`C. D-111 (these is not relevant to any damages issue and would not be a proper line of
`
`cross-examination); and
`
`D. D-117-D-121, D-123-D-133 (See Doc. No. 287, ¶ 2 “ . . . if Defendants believe
`
`Plaintiff’s presentation of evidence makes Ding’s alleged untruthfulness in regards to
`
`his termination relevant on direct-examination, Defendants may re-raise this issue at
`
`side-bar, pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 608. . . .[t]he Court will examine
`
`whether such cross-examination is proper pursuant to Rule 608 and Rule 403”).
`
`
`
`4. Plaintiff’s objections to the following Defendants’ exhibits are OVERRULED:
`
`A. D-35, D-41, D-53, D-61, D-70-D-74 (to the extent Defendants use these documents to
`
`establish certain Georgia-Pacific factors or rebut Plaintiff’s contentions in these
`
`regards);
`
`B. D-45, D-54, D-56-D-58;
`
`C. D-46, D-55;
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 2:14-cv-00111-AJS Document 314 Filed 04/20/15 Page 3 of 4
`
`D. D-62, D-112-D116, D-122 (as previously ordered, Defendants may not use these
`
`documents to set forth the substance or parameters of Ding’s work at his former
`
`employer or reference the circumstances of his termination. Defendants’ use of these
`
`documents is strictly confined to Georgia-Pacific factor 9. To the extent these
`
`documents reference Ding’s termination, Defendants shall redact these documents
`
`prior to presenting them to the jury. Plaintiff may orally lodge an objection if
`
`Defendants’ use of these documents exceeds these limited grounds);
`
`E. D-76;
`
`F. D-80-D-81;
`
`G. D-83-D-93;
`
`H. D-94-D-103, D-110 (to the extent that Defendants use these documents to establish
`
`the identified Georgia-Pacific factors. Defendants may not use these exhibits in any
`
`attempt to question the validity of Plaintiff’s patents or their infringement of the
`
`patents); and
`
`I. D-138-D-145 (without objection; Plaintiff may re-raise any objection should it
`
`become relevant).
`
`
`
`5. Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion in Limine (Doc. No. 300) is GRANTED to the extent that the
`
`requested relief is consistent with this Order and DENIED to the extent the requested
`
`relief is inconsistent with the preceding rulings.
`
`
`
`6. The trial, scheduled to commence on April 27, 2015, will proceed in accordance with
`
`these evidentiary rulings. All witnesses and counsel shall limit their testimony and
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 2:14-cv-00111-AJS Document 314 Filed 04/20/15 Page 4 of 4
`
`presentation of evidence related to the jury’s calculation of a damages award, consistent
`
`with this and prior Orders of Court.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`s/ Arthur J. Schwab
`Arthur J. Schwab
`United States District Judge
`
`cc:
`
`All Registered ECF Counsel and Parties
`
`4
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
