`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
`
`Richmond Division
`
`72
`
`3 0 2015
`
`ir/
`
`CLERK, U.S. niS IRICT COURT
`RICr-i;.:OrjlJ. VA
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO.,
`LTD., et al.,
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`V.
`
`Civil Action No. 3:14cv757
`
`NVIDIA CORPORATION,
`et al.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`ORDER
`
`Having considered SAMSUNG'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE DR.
`
`PUTNAM'S LEGAL CONCLUSIONS AND TESTIMONY ABOUT SAMSUNG'S FINANCIAL
`
`POSITION (Docket No. 322),
`
`the supporting and opposing memoranda,
`
`and finding that
`
`the testimony of Dr. Putnam providing his legal
`
`opinions for purposes of setting context for his economic opinion
`
`is irrelevant, is likely to confuse the jury and is thus prejudicial
`
`under Fed. R. Evid. 403, and is beyond the scope of expert testimony
`
`because it will not help the finder of the fact, it is hereby ORDERED
`
`that
`
`SAMSUNG'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE DR.
`
`PUTNAM'S LEGAL
`
`CONCLUSIONS AND TESTIMONY ABOUT SAMSUNG'S FINANCIAL POSITION (Docket
`
`No. 322)
`
`is granted.
`
`The motion is denied as moot respecting the
`
`testimony about Samsung's
`
`financial position by virtue of
`
`the
`
`stipulation that the parties have reached which governs that topic.
`
`
`
`Case 3:14-cv-00757-REP-DJN Document 509 Filed 11/30/15 Page 2 of 2 PageID# 34107
`Case 3:14-cv-00757—REP-DJN Document 509 Filed 11/30/15 Page 2 of 2 Page|D# 34107
`
`It is further ORDERED that the facts and legal contentions are
`
`adequately presented in the materials before the Court and oral
`
`argument would not aid the decisional process.
`
`It is so ORDERED.
`
`/s/
`
`5W
`
`Robert E. Payne
`Senior United States District Judge
`
`Richmond, Virginia
`Date: November 30, 2015
`
`