the other considerations
Plaintiffs motion in limine 3, seeking to exclude testimony and argumentinconsistent with the Court's claim construction, is
All parties agree that suchevidence and argument will not be permitted.
Plaintiffs motion in limine 4, seeking to exclude evidence regarding "unrelated"licenses not comparable to the hypothetical licenses
issue in this case, is
The Courtis not persuaded that the licenses at issue are so non-comparable as to be irrelevant or to rendertheir probative value so minimal as to be substantially outweighed by the concerns embodied inRule 403. Plaintiffs concerns are best be addressed through cross-examination
Defendants'witnesses as well as presentation
Defendants' motion in limine
seeking to preclude any mention or use
Buffalo's settlement with Enova, is
The parties' experts may offer their competinganalyses as to the weight,
any, to be given to this settlement. The Court is not persuaded thatuse
the settlement agreement is barred by Rule 408 or that its admission is improper under theweighing required by Rule 403.
Defendants' motion in limine 2, seeking to preclude improper or insufficient pre-suit knowledge
the patents-in-suit, is
Plaintiff fails to address Defendants'arguments. Additionally, the Court is persuaded that the evidence at issue is inadmissiblehearsay
Rule 802) and that any probative value
such evidence is substantially outweighed
undue prejudice and confusion, making exclusion proper under Rule 403.
Defendants' motion in limine 3, seeking to preclude evidence
lost sales orprice erosion, is
Plaintiff is not seeking, and cannot demonstrate, lost sales or price2
Case 1:10-cv-00004-LPS Document 458 Filed 01/31/13 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 16355