Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_12-cv-05826/USCOURTS-cand-5_12-cv-05826-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

1 

Case Nos. 5:12-cv-05826-PSG

ORDER GRANTING-IN-PART MOTIONS TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF EXPERT REPORTS

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION

GOOD TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION and 

GOOD TECHNOLOGY SOFTWARE, INC., 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

MOBILEIRON, INC., 

 Defendant. 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

Case No. 5:12-cv-05826-PSG

ORDER GRANTING-IN-PART 

MOTIONS TO STRIKE PORTIONS 

OF EXPERT REPORTS

(Re: Docket Nos. 178, 185) 

Plaintiffs Good Technology Corporation and Good Technology Software, Inc. (“Good”)

and Defendant MobileIron, Inc. each move to strike portions of the other’s expert reports. Upon 

extended review of the parties’ papers and consideration of today’s lengthy oral arguments, both 

motions are GRANTED-IN-PART.1 

There are two key issues to consider: was the portion of the expert report previously 

disclosed, and if not, was the non-disclosure substantially justified and harmless? Courts in this 

district consider five factors to determine whether a non-disclosure was substantially justified or 

harmless: “(1) the surprise to the party against whom the evidence would be offered; (2) the ability 

of that party to cure the surprise; (3) the extent to which allowing the evidence would disrupt the 

 

1

 Any issues omitted from this order were deemed withdrawn according to the parties’ 

representations on the papers and at oral argument. 

Case 5:12-cv-05826-PSG Document 278 Filed 04/23/15 Page 1 of 2
Case 5:12-cv-05826-PSG Document 278 Filed 04/23/15 Page 2 of 2