Opinion ID: 223136
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Relevant Pre-Trial Proceedings

Text: In anticipation of trial, Kirtsaeng submitted proposed jury instructions charging that the first sale doctrine was a defense to copyright infringement. By Order dated October 9, 2009, the District Court prohibited Kirtsaeng from raising this defense and rejected the applicability of the first sale doctrine to foreign editions of textbooks, holding that [t]here is no indication that the imported books at issue here were manufactured pursuant to the U.S. Copyright Act ... [and,] [t]o the contrary, the textbooks introduced as evidence purport, on their face, to have been published outside of the United States. [11] On October 23, 2009 and November 3, 2009, Kirtsaeng filed motions in limine to preclude the introduction at trial of (1) his online PayPal sales records, and specifically, evidence of his gross revenues from the sales of the foreign editions of Wiley's books, and (2) the profits he earned on unrelated sales activities. From the bench during a pre-trial conference on November 3, 2009, the District Court granted the motions in part and denied them in part. The Court explained that Wiley could not introduce evidence of profits earned by Kirtsaeng from the sales of textbooks produced by other publishers, but in ... anticipation that the net worth testimony [would indicate] that [Kirtsaeng did not have] significant net worth ... [Wiley's counsel had the] right to inquire about additional revenues and the profits there-from and where they went in order to make sure that we had an accurate record about [Kirtsaeng's] net worth. Joint App'x at 195. The Court further stated that Wiley's counsel must be careful not to refer to these [unrelated] sales in any way as infringing sales, because that would be entirely improper. Id.