The court granted plaintiff's motion in limine to preclude evidence of reexamination. "[E]vidence or argument concerning the Patent Office's reexamination of the [patent-in-suit] is probative of validity; however, in most instances, its probative value is substantially outweighed by its prejudicial effect, as any lay jury would be automatically inclined to defer to the findings of the government agency that issued the patent in the first instance. . . . This decision shall in no way prevent [defendant] from presenting evidence and argument relating to prior art that is properly in evidence, or explaining to the jury that certain prior art references were not before the Patent Office when it issued the [patent] to help meet its burden of proving invalidity by clear and convincing evidence."
General Electric Company v. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., et. al., 3-10-cv-00276 (TXND February 21, 2012, Order) (Furgeson, J.)