Opinion
19-cv-05836-JSW
11-30-2023
MARC CHAN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ARCSOFT, INC., et al., Defendants.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY COURT SHOULD CONSIDER OBJECTIONS TO TESTIMONY OF MS. WENTING YU AND MR. WILLIAM NEIDIG RE: DKT. NO. 260
JEFFREY S. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
The Court's Standing Orders limit each side to five (5) motions in limine. Defendants submitted five motions in limine, and they did not request leave to file excess motions. Nevertheless, Defendants use over three pages of their pretrial brief arguing that the Court should exclude the testimony of Ms. Wenting Yu. Defendants also use their pretrial brief to provide the basis for their objection to the testimony of Mr. William Neidig, although they state that they “reserve that objection for trial.”
Defendants effectively use their pretrial brief to submit additional motions in limine in violation of the Court's Standing Orders. Defendants are thus ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the Court should consider their objections to the testimony of Ms. Yu and Mr. Neidig and why the Court should not impose sanctions. Defendants shall respond no later than December 4, 2023.
IT IS SO ORDERED.