Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-01267/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-01267-15/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:101 Copyright Infringement

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

LILITH GAMES (SHANGHAI) CO. 

LTD., 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

UCOOL, INC. AND UCOOL LTD., 

 Defendants. 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

Case No. 15-CV-01267-SC

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' 

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO 

EXCLUDE EVIDENCE 

On September 11, 2015, the Court will hold a hearing on 

Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction. The hearing has 

been repeatedly delayed, primarily in order to provide Defendants 

with the opportunity to perform discovery in support of their 

opposition. Now before the Court is Defendants' latest request to 

delay the hearing or to limit the evidence admitted at the hearing. 

ECF Nos. 102 ("Mot."), 104 ("Opp'n"). For the following reasons, 

Defendants motion is DENIED. Plaintiffs are hereby ORDERED to file 

under seal1

 a written version of the Lua code analysis they intend 

 

1

 An attendant motion to seal is unnecessary. 

Case 5:15-cv-01267-LHK Document 105 Filed 09/09/15 Page 1 of 3
2 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California 

to present at the hearing no later than 12:00PM (noon) on September 

10, 2015. 

 Plaintiff has repeatedly sought the Lua Code embodied in 

Defendants' game, Heroes Charge. Defendants' primary objection to 

producing the code was that Plaintiff was not entitled to discovery 

because it had not adequately disclosed the trade secret allegedly 

misappropriated by Defendants. On July 9, 2015, the Court held 

that Plaintiff had adequately disclosed the trade secret, and 

Plaintiff was not barred from taking discovery. ECF No. 66. 

Less than a week after the Court's order, Plaintiff requested 

the Defendants make the Lua code embodied in Heroes Charge 

available for review no later than July 20, 2015. Defendants, 

however, did not produce the code until after the briefing closed 

on Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction. Further, the 

code that was produced was incomplete. Defendants now argue that 

Plaintiff's expert should be prohibited from testifying at the 

preliminary injunction hearing regarding his analysis of the code, 

or that the hearing should be delayed once more. 

Further delay is unacceptable. Moreover, in order for the 

Court to make a fully informed decision, testimony from each side's 

experts regarding the Lua code is necessary. Accordingly, 

Plaintiff's expert will be permitted to testify at the preliminary 

injunction hearing regarding his analysis of the Lua code. The 

testimony will serve as rebuttal evidence to Defendants' analysis 

of the Lua code submitted as part of their briefing. Plaintiffs 

/// 

/// 

/// 

Case 5:15-cv-01267-LHK Document 105 Filed 09/09/15 Page 2 of 3
3 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California 

are ORDERED to file under seal a written version of the Lua code 

analysis they intend to present at the hearing no later than 

12:00PM (noon) on September 10, 2015. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 Dated: September 9, 2015 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 5:15-cv-01267-LHK Document 105 Filed 09/09/15 Page 3 of 3