Loading...
A federal judge in the Eastern District of Texas, Rodney Gilstrap, recently issued a ruling restricting certain words’ use in a patent infringement retrial between two rival garage-door opener makers. The judge has barred the use of terms such as “yahoos,” “fake news,” and “patent factory” in the courtroom.
The purpose of this ruling is to prevent the use of prejudicial language in front of the jury, which is a common practice in patent cases. For example, words such as “pirates,” “bandits,” or “trolls” are frequently banned in patent cases as they could potentially influence the jury.
In the first trial, one of the lawyers referred to the jury pool as “yahoos” and stated that the opposing side filed the lawsuit in Marshall, Texas, because they believed the citizens of East Texas were “yahoos” and wouldn’t use their common sense.
Judge Gilstrap granted a motion to bar any reference to the jury pool, court, or citizens constituting the jury pool as “yahoos” or any similar derogatory terms. He further instructed the lawyers not to refer to the intelligence of the jury, the court, the Marshall Division population, or the Eastern District of Texas.
The judge ruled that the term “yahoos” was derogatory and should not be used, and two other terms, “patent factory” and “fake news,” were also off limits. However, the parties are still allowed to use the term “frivolous” in their closing arguments to attack the opposing side’s arguments.
This ruling highlights the importance of avoiding prejudicial language in courtrooms and ensuring that the proceedings are fair and impartial. Lawyers will now have to be more creative and find alternative ways to attack the opposing side’s arguments.
Get JD Journal in Your Mail
Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!
It is also worth noting that this ruling is not a violation of the First Amendment, as the judge is simply trying to ensure that there is no prejudicial language used in front of the jury. Such restrictions are becoming increasingly common in patent cases, as certain words can potentially influence the trial’s outcome.
In conclusion, the ruling by Judge Gilstrap in the Eastern District of Texas serves as a reminder of the importance of avoiding prejudicial language in courtrooms and the need to ensure that the proceedings are fair and impartial.
