Case 3:01-cv-02104-SRU
Document 167
Filed 12/29/2004
Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT OMEGA, S.A., Plaintiff, v. OMEGA ENGINEERING, INC., et al. Defendants. : : : : : : : : :
NO.
3:01CV2104 (MRK)
OMEGA ENGINEERING, INC., Counterclaim-Plaintiff, v. OMEGA, S.A. and THE SWATCH GROUP LTD., Counterclaim-Defendants.
: : : : : : : : : :
ORDER On August 19, 2004 [doc. #98], this Court denied without prejudice Omega Engineering Inc.'s ("OEI") Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [doc. #69], in the expectation that all the arguments presented therein and in OEI's associated briefings to the Court would be incorporated into OEI's currently pending Motion for Summary Judgment [doc. #101]. OEI's still pending Motion for Preclusion of Evidence [doc. #80] was part of its reply brief to the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [doc. #69], and as such, the Court fully expected that the arguments in the Motion for Preclusion of Evidence [doc. #80] would be incorporated into its currently pending motion for summary judgment. This has, in fact, occurred. OEI's request for an order precluding evidence of foreign trademark filings is explicitly a part of OEI's motion for summary
Case 3:01-cv-02104-SRU
Document 167
Filed 12/29/2004
Page 2 of 2
judgment, which expressly incorporates by reference the arguments and evidentiary submissions previously made in support of the Motion for Preclusion of Evidence. See Def.'s Mem. in Supp. of Mot. for Summ. J. [doc. #121], at 37. Because OEI's Motion for Preclusion of Evidence [doc. #80] is duplicative of its later-filed motion for summary judgment, the Court DENIES OEI's Motion for Preclusion of Evidence [doc. #80] with the expectation that the Court will address the merits of all of OEI's preclusion arguments in connection with its consideration of OEI's motion for summary judgment. IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/
Mark R. Kravitz United States District Judge
Dated at New Haven, Connecticut: December 29, 2004.