Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 441 Filed 02/02/18 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 30060
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`C.A. No. 16-453 (RGA)
`
`
`
`ACCELERATION BAY LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`ACTIVISION BLIZZARD, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`ACTIVISION’S DAUBERT MOTION TO EXCLUDE EXPERT OPINIONS
`OF DR. NENAD MEDVIDOVIC, DR. MICHAEL MITZENMACHER
`DR. CHRISTINE MEYER, DR. HARRY BIMS AND DR. RICARDO VALERDI
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, Activision Blizzard, Inc. (“Activision”)
`
`hereby moves to exclude certain expert testimony propounded by Plaintiff Acceleration Bay
`
`LLC. The grounds for this motion are set forth in Activision’s accompanying brief. The
`
`precise relief sought is detailed in a proposed order accompanying this motion.
`
`MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARSHT & TUNNELL LLP
`
`
`/s/ Stephen J. Kraftschik
`_______________________________________
`Jack B. Blumenfeld (#1014)
`Stephen J. Kraftschik (#5623)
`1201 North Market Street
`P.O. Box 1347
`Wilmington, DE 19899
`(302) 658-9200
`jblumenfeld@mnat.com
`skraftschik@mnat.com
`
`
`Attorneys for Defendant
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`
`Michael A. Tomasulo
`Gino Cheng
`David K. Lin
`Joe S. Netikosol
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`333 South Grand Avenue, 38th Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90071
`(213) 615-1700
`
`David P. Enzminger
`Louis L. Campbell
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`275 Middlefield Road, Suite 205
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`
`C.A. No. 16-453 (RGA)
`
`
`
`ACCELERATION BAY LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`ACTIVISION BLIZZARD, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`ACTIVISION’S DAUBERT MOTION TO EXCLUDE EXPERT OPINIONS
`OF DR. NENAD MEDVIDOVIC, DR. MICHAEL MITZENMACHER
`DR. CHRISTINE MEYER, DR. HARRY BIMS AND DR. RICARDO VALERDI
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, Activision Blizzard, Inc. (“Activision”)
`
`hereby moves to exclude certain expert testimony propounded by Plaintiff Acceleration Bay
`
`LLC. The grounds for this motion are set forth in Activision’s accompanying brief. The
`
`precise relief sought is detailed in a proposed order accompanying this motion.
`
`MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARSHT & TUNNELL LLP
`
`
`/s/ Stephen J. Kraftschik
`_______________________________________
`Jack B. Blumenfeld (#1014)
`Stephen J. Kraftschik (#5623)
`1201 North Market Street
`P.O. Box 1347
`Wilmington, DE 19899
`(302) 658-9200
`jblumenfeld@mnat.com
`skraftschik@mnat.com
`
`
`Attorneys for Defendant
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`
`Michael A. Tomasulo
`Gino Cheng
`David K. Lin
`Joe S. Netikosol
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`333 South Grand Avenue, 38th Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90071
`(213) 615-1700
`
`David P. Enzminger
`Louis L. Campbell
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`275 Middlefield Road, Suite 205
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 441 Filed 02/02/18 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 30061
`
`Menlo Park, CA 94025
`(650) 858-6500
`
`Dan K. Webb
`Kathleen B. Barry
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`35 West Wacker Drive
`Chicago, IL 60601
`(312) 558-5600
`
`Krista M. Enns
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`101 California Street, 35th Floor
`San Francisco, CA 94111
`(415) 591-1000
`
`Michael M. Murray
`Anup K. Misra
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`200 Park Avenue,
`New York, NY 10166
`(212) 294-6700
`
`Andrew R. Sommer
`Thomas M. Dunham
`Michael Woods
`Paul N. Harold
`Joseph C. Masullo
`WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
`1700 K Street, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20006
`(202) 282-5000
`
`February 2, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 441 Filed 02/02/18 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 30062
`
`
`
`7.1.1 CERTIFICATION
`
`I hereby certify that the subject of the foregoing motion has been discussed with
`
`counsel for the plaintiff and that we have not been able to reach agreement.
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Stephen J. Kraftschik
`
`Stephen J. Kraftschik (#5623)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 441 Filed 02/02/18 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 30063
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`[PROPOSED] ORDER
`
`
`
`
`
`C.A. No. 16-453 (RGA)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`ACCELERATION BAY LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`ACTIVISION BLIZZARD, INC.,
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`WHEREAS, the Court, having consider Activision Blizzard, Inc.’s Daubert Motion To
`
`Exclude Expert Opinions Of Dr. Nenad Medvidovic, Dr. Michael Mitzenmacher Dr. Christine
`
`Meyer, Dr. Harry Bims and Dr. Ricardo Valerdi;
`
`IT IS HEREBY ORDERED this _______ day of _______________, 2018, that
`
`Activision’s Motion is GRANTED. The following opinions are excluded:
`
`1) All opinions of Christine Meyer related to damages including the following:
`
`a. Dr. Meyer’s reliance on the date of the first lawsuit as the date of the
`
`hypothetical negotiation.
`
`b. Dr. Meyer’s opinions that Boeing intended to limit the Sony License to use
`
`in internal communications.
`
`c. Dr. Meyer’s opinions about the Sony License, which are inconsistent with
`
`the Court’s previous rulings.
`
`d. Dr. Meyer’s opinions that the Uniloc v. Electronic Arts verdict supports a
`
`royalty rate of 20 cents per unit.
`
`e. Dr. Meyer’s opinions that the 20 cents per unit royalty rate from the Uniloc
`
`v. Electronic Arts verdict should be multiplied by 10.5.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 441 Filed 02/02/18 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 30064
`
`
`
`
`
`f. Dr. Meyer’s reliance on the opinions of Dr. Bims.
`
`g. Dr. Meyer’s opinions that the number of accused units should include future
`
`units, which the Court excluded from this case.
`
`h. Dr. Meyer’s reliance on the opinions of Dr. Valerdi.
`
`i. Dr. Meyer’s opinions regarding the value of the alleged use of the Asserted
`
`Patents for failure to apportion.
`
`j. Dr. Meyer’s opinions regarding all damages amounts.
`
`2) All opinions of Harry Bims related to damages including the following:
`
`a. Dr. Bims’ opinions that the Asserted Patents are comparable to U.S. Patent
`
`No. 5,490,216.
`
`b. Dr. Bims’ opinions that the Asserted Patents have a value between 6 and 15
`
`times the value of U.S. Patent No. 5,490,216, based on counting the number
`
`of patents and from the trial testimony of Uniloc’s expert in Uniloc v.
`
`Electronic Arts, No. 6:13-CV-00259-RWS (E.D. Tex.)
`
`3) All opinions of Ricardo Valerdi related to cost estimates, design around costs, or
`
`non-infringing alternatives.
`
`4) All opinions of Nenad Medvidovic and Michael Mitzenmacher in which they state
`
`conclusions based on string citations to extensive source code without explaining
`
`how the code supports their opinions, including Med.Rpt. ¶¶188, 191, 193-94, 196,
`
`198-99, 201-203, 246, 279, 305, 415, 416, 461, 206, 213-14, and 248 and Mitz.Rpt.
`
`¶¶121-22, 126-131, 133-35, 160, 186, 193, 295-96, and 320-21.
`
`__________________________________
`Judge Richard G. Andrews
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:16-cv-00453-RGA Document 441 Filed 02/02/18 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 30065
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on February 2, 2018, I caused the foregoing to be
`
`
`
`electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF, which will send notification of
`
`such filing to all registered participants.
`
`
`
`
`
`I further certify that I caused copies of the foregoing document to be served on
`
`February 2, 2018, upon the following in the manner indicated:
`
`Philip A. Rovner, Esquire
`Jonathan A. Choa, Esquire
`POTTER ANDERSON & CORROON LLP
`1313 North Market Street, 6th Floor
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`Paul J. Andre, Esquire
`Lisa Kobialka, Esquire
`James R. Hannah, Esquire
`Hannah Lee, Esquire
`Yuridia Caire, Esquire
`Greg Proctor, Esquire
`KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL LLP
`990 Marsh Road
`Menlo Park, CA 94025
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`Aaron M. Frankel, Esquire
`Marcus A. Colucci, Esquire
`KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL LLP
`1177 Avenue of the Americas
`New York, NY 10036
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`
`VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
`
`VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
`
`VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
`
`
`/s/ Stephen J. Kraftschik
`________________________________
`Stephen J. Kraftschik (#5623)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
