DealDash Oyj et al v. ContextLogic Inc., No. 3:2018cv02353 - Document 212 (N.D. Cal. 2019)

Court Description: ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO EXCLUDE EXPERT OPINIONS; GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on June 18, 2019. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/18/2019)

Download PDF
DealDash Oyj et al v. ContextLogic Inc. Doc. 212 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 DEALDASH OYJ, et al., Plaintiffs, United States District Court Northern District of California 11 v. 12 13 CONTEXTLOGIC INC., Defendant. 14 Case No. 18-cv-02353-MMC ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO EXCLUDE EXPERT OPINIONS; GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Re: Dkt. Nos. 140, 142, 145, 147, 149, 154 15 16 Before the Court are the following six motions, each filed May 10, 2019: (1) 17 18 defendant’s “Motion to Exclude Opinions and Testimony of Michael Wagner”; (2) 19 defendant’s “Motion Pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 702 and Daubert to Exclude Evidence or 20 Testimony from Dr. Jeffrey Stec”; (3) plaintiffs’ “Motion to Strike and Exclude Certain 21 Opinions of Defendant’s Expert John Hansen”; (4) plaintiffs’ “Motion to Strike and 22 Exclude Opinions of Defendant’s Expert Philip Johnson”; (5) defendant’s “Motion for 23 Summary Judgment”; and (6) plaintiffs’ “Motion for Summary Judgment.” Each such 24 motion has been fully briefed. The matters came on regularly for hearing on June 14, 25 2019. Matthew S. Warren and Amy M. Bailey of Warren Lex LLP appeared on behalf of 26 plaintiffs. John W. Crittenden, Bobby Ghajar, and Angela L. Dunning of Cooley LLP 27 appeared on behalf of defendant. 28 // Dockets.Justia.com Having considered the parties’ respective submissions and the arguments of 1 2 counsel at the hearing, the Court, for the reasons stated on the record at the hearing, 3 hereby rules as follows. 1. Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Opinions and Testimony of Michael Wagner is 4 DENIED. 5 2. Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Evidence or Testimony from Dr. Jeffrey Stec is 6 DENIED. 7 3. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike and Exclude Certain Opinions of John Hansen is 8 DENIED.1 United States District Court Northern District of California 9 10 4. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike and Exclude Opinions of Philip Johnson is DENIED, 11 conditioned on defendant’s providing to plaintiff, no later than July 8, 2019, the 12 following discovery: (a) one or more declarations setting forth (i) the videos 13 given to Johnson by defendant’s counsel or any other individual acting on 14 behalf of defendant, as well as (ii) any videos to which he otherwise had 15 access and viewed; and (b) screenshots of the survey he conducted. 5. Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED as to all Counts 16 17 other than Count IV, as to which Count the Motion is DENIED to the extent 18 plaintiffs seek an award of damages and GRANTED to the extent plaintiffs 19 seek an injunction. 20 6. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 23 Dated: June 18, 2019 MAXINE M. CHESNEY United States District Judge 24 25 26 1 27 28 The Court notes that, in connection with said ruling, defendant has been directed to make available for a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition, not to exceed two hours in length, the person most knowledgeable on the subject of Add-to-Cart data for the months prior to October 2017. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.