W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. C.R. Bard, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 11-515 -LPS, November 24, 2015.

Stark, C.J.   The court rules on objections to Magistrate’s rulings on a Daubert motion and a Report and Recommendation on anticipation.

A motion to admit or reject testimony is non-dispositive and is reviewed on an abuse of discretion standard. Objections to a Magistrate’s Daubert decision are subject to a clearly erroneous and contrary to law standard. The objections to the magistrate’s order allowing plaintiff’s new expert evidence on the eve of trial are overruled. The Daubert objections seeking to exclude all testimony are inequitable in this case where the testimony is critical and are overruled. Defendants’ objections to the magistrate’s report and recommendation on anticipation are overruled and the report adopted.  Plaintiff’s motions for summary judgment of no anticipation is granted in part and denied in part consistent with the report which leaves one prior art reference unresolved.  The court will not fault the magistrate for not deciding an issue that the parties have not fully briefed.