Case 1:12-cv-00023-GMS Document 151 Filed 01/02/14 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 6459

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES LLC, et al., Plaintiffs,
V.

)
)

)
)
)

Civil Action No. 12-23 (GMS)

MEDTRONIC CO REV AL VE LLC, et al., )

) )

Defendants.

ORDER

At Wilmington, this _!__ day of January, 2014, having considered the letter brief submitted by the plaintiffs Edwards Lifesciences LLC and Edwards Lifesciences PVT, Inc., (collectively "Edwards") regarding their motions in limine 2 and 9 (D.I. 135), 1 the letter brief in opposition submitted by the defendants Medtronic Core Valve LLC, Medtronic CV Luxembourg S.a.r.l., Medtronic Vascular Galway Ltd., Medtronic, Inc., and Medtronic Vascular, Inc., (collectively "Medtronic") (D.I. 145), and the discussion by the parties of the motion's issues during the pretrial conference on December 4, 2013; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Edwards' motions in limine 2 and 9 are GRANTED. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 403, the court has broad discretion to exclude evidence where the probative value of such evidence is substantially outweighed by, among other things, the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury. In the instant case, there is a substantial risk of prejudice to Edwards given the strong likelihood that the jury would
Edwards' motion in limine 2 relates to: "Whether Medtronic should be precluded from presenting evidence or argument to the jury concerning decisions in foreign litigations." Edwards' motion in limine 9, in tum, relates to: "Whether Medtronic should be precluded from presenting evidence or argument to the jury concerning European Patent Office opposition proceedings involving European Patent No. 2 000 115 or any other European patent related thereto." (D.I. 127.)

r-t

Case 1:12-cv-00023-GMS Document 151 Filed 01/02/14 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 6460

be confused and give undue deference to the foreign decisions and proceedings. See, e.g.,
Pharmastem Therapeutics, Inc. v. Viacell Inc., C.A. No. 02-148 (GMS), 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS

17137, *9 (D. Del. Sept. 30, 2003) ("An opinion, although of a quasi-judicial or administrative body and albeit that of a foreign jurisdiction, carries with it a certain imprimatur, which creates a substantial risk that the jury will give its conclusions undue deference.") Simultaneously, the probative value of these decisions and proceedings hardly outweighs the substantial risk of prejudice. Proceedings and the decisions arising from proceedings conducted in foreign

jurisdictions, under foreign substantive law and foreign procedural rules, and concerning a foreign patent that is not at issue in the instant action, are of dubious probative value. The court will exercise its discretion and exclude both evidence and arguments relating to decisions in foreign litigations and European Patent Office Opposition proceedings involving European Patent No 2 000 115.