Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-03227/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-03227-22/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 15:1126 Patent Infringement

---

1

Case No. 14-cv-03227-PSG

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS IN LIMINE

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SILICON LABORATORIES, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

CRESTA TECHNOLOGY 

CORPORATION,

Defendant.

Case No. 14-cv-03227-PSG

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS 

IN LIMINE

(Re: Docket No. 213)

Now before the court are no fewer than 45 motions in limine by Plaintiff Silicon 

Laboratories, Inc.1 A brief perusal reveals any number of motions that are at best unnecessary and 

at worst ridiculous. For example, Silicon Labs’ third motion in limine asks the court to do nothing 

more than apply Fed. R. Evid. 408, which would apply in any event. Similarly, the fourth motion 

in limine, as well as numbers 38 through 42, seek to bar previously unidentified witnesses from 

testifying at trial, which Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3) already precludes. And on and on it goes.

Motions in limine are not designed to ensure the perfect trial. They serve a much more 

limited purpose—to avoid errors at trial that the court cannot cure by sustaining an objection or 

issuing a corrective instruction to the jury. Silicon Labs’ motions, taken as a whole, ignore these 

boundaries completely.

All 45 of Silicon Labs’ motions in limine are DENIED. No later than Friday, March 11, 

2016, Silicon Labs shall re-file no more than seven motions in limine—in one filing no longer 

than 12 pages—that truly require intervention by the court. Defendant Cresta Technology 

 

1

See Docket No. 213.

Case 3:14-cv-03227-JCS Document 241 Filed 03/09/16 Page 1 of 2
2

Case No. 14-cv-03227-PSG

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS IN LIMINE

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

Northern District of California

Corporation shall have until Tuesday, March 15, 2016 to file any opposition. The court will 

consider the motions at the final pretrial conference on Friday, March 18, 2016.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 9, 2016

_________________________________

PAUL S. GREWAL

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:14-cv-03227-JCS Document 241 Filed 03/09/16 Page 2 of 2