Sig Sauer, et al. v. Freed Designs (Doc. No. 89)
This text of 2017 DNH 190 (Sig Sauer, et al. v. Freed Designs (Doc. No. 89)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Sig Sauer, Inc.; Check-Mate Industries, Inc.; Check-Mate International Products, Inc.; Nordon, Inc.; and Thomas Pierce d/b/a Pierce Designs, Plaintiffs
v. Case No. 14-cv-461-SM Opinion No. 2017 DNH 190 Freed Designs, Inc., Defendant
O R D E R
Defendant’s motion to strike the declaration of J.B. Wood
(document no. 89) is denied, but without prejudice to
interposing an appropriate objection at trial.
Federal Rule of Evidence 702 permits both opinion and
useful non-opinion testimony based upon specialized knowledge,
skill, experience, training or education. The record discloses
that Mr. Wood is particularly well-qualified to provide both
opinion and useful non-opinion evidence in the pertinent field
of gunsmithing and firearms design and function based upon his
specialized knowledge, extended training, extensive experience,
skill, and education. It also seems self-evident that Mr. Wood
1 is a person of at least ordinary skill in the arts pertinent to
understanding the patent-in-suit.
Conclusion
The motion to strike declaration (document no. 89) is
denied, but without prejudice to interposing an appropriate
objection at trial.
SO ORDERED.
____________________________ Steven J. McAuliffe United States District Judge
September 14, 2017
cc: Laura L. Carroll, Esq. Zachary R. Gates, Esq. Neal E. Friedman, Esq. Michael J. Bujold, Esq.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2017 DNH 190, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sig-sauer-et-al-v-freed-designs-doc-no-89-nhd-2017.