In a patent infringement action between hockey equipment manufacturers, the parties brought cross-motions to exclude various expert reports.
The Court dismissed the defendant's motion to exclude a report under Rule 248, finding the expert relied on disclosed documents.
The Court granted the defendant's motion to strike the plaintiff's expert reply report on reasonable royalty as improper reply.
The Court exercised its discretion to admit another expert reply report on accounting for profits.
The plaintiff's motion to strike portions of the defendant's responding and reply reports was dismissed.
