Axanar Orders on Motions in Limine to Exclude Evidence

Janet Gershen-Siegel

Jespah (Janet Gershen-Siegel) has been a fan of Star Trek since probably the first set of reruns of The Original Series. She has an eclectic background, including an undergraduate degree in Philosophy, a JD (she practiced insurance defense law for a few years in New York and is a lot happier since she retired from that in 1990), and a MS in Interactive Media, which is a real-live social media degree.

Along the way, she has about a decade and a half of data analysis work under her belt and currently works as a blog coordinator for a high-end wedding blog and also as a blogger for hire (topics include diverse subjects like ad retargeting but also the nursing job market), and has a shingle out to work on social media presence, with a focus on independent authors as she is also a published science fiction author. Plus, she has been a community manager for a large Q & A website since 2002, which is before that existed as a job title.

She was raised on Long Island so, when she is riled up, the accent gallops back out and she can sound like Fran Drescher with a law degree. She lives in Boston with her husband of over 20 years and more computers than they need.

She can always be bribed with pie.

Axanar Orders on Motions in Limine to Exclude Evidence

Judge Klausner has issued Axanar Orders on the various motions in limine and we have the tentative order (which may change).

Judge Klausner’s Axanar Orders on Motions in Limine to Exclude Evidence

Axanar Orders on Motions in Limine to Exclude Evidence

Axanar Orders on Motions in Limine to Exclude Evidence

First of all, recognize this could change. Therefore, we will keep you informed if it does. However, currently, this is what we’ve got. Also, many, many thanks to Jody Wheeler and Carlos Pedraza for getting the documents straightened out.

Defense Motions

Defense Motion in Limine #1

Axanar Defense Motions – Motion in Limine #1

So Defendants’ Motion In Limine No. 1 to preclude Plaintiffs from relying on evidence concerning alleged discovery violations: GRANTED

Defense Motion in Limine #2

Axanar Defense Motions – Motion in Limine #2

Furthermore, Defendants’ Motion In Limine No. 2 to preclude Plaintiffs from relying on evidence that was not timely disclosed under the Court’s scheduling order: DENIED

Defense Motion in Limine #3

Axanar Defense Motions – Motion in Limine #3

In addition, Defendants’ Motion In Limine No. 3 to preclude Plaintiffs from introducing evidence regarding allegedly infringed works not identified in the First Amended Complaint: GRANTED

Defense Motion in Limine #4

Axanar Defense Motions – Motion in Limine #4

Furthermore, Defendants’ Motion In Limine No. 4 to preclude Plaintiffs from relying on evidence regarding items that are unoriginal, in the public domain, or from third parties: GRANTED

Defense Motion in Limine #5

Axanar Defense Motions – Motion in Limine #5

Also, Defendants’ Motion In Limine No. 5 to preclude Plaintiffs from relying on evidence concerning personal drama, smear campaign, and other irrelevant communications, including witnesses Christian Gossett and Terry McIntosh: GRANTED

Defense Motion in Limine #6

Axanar Defense Motions – Motion in Limine #6

So, Defendants’ Motion In Limine No. 6 to preclude Plaintiffs from introducing evidence referencing irrelevant, superseded scripts: GRANTED

Defense Motion in Limine #7

Axanar Defense Motions – Motion in Limine #7

Furthermore, Defendants’ Motion In Limine No. 7 to preclude Plaintiffs from introducing or mentioning certain of Defendants’ financial information and references to “profits” allegedly earned by Defendants: DENIED

Defense Motion in Limine #8

Axanar Defense Motions – Motion in Limine #8

In addition, Defendants’ Motion In Limine No. 8 to preclude Plaintiffs from introducing evidence regarding Defendants’ use of the “Star Trek” name: DENIED

Defense Motion in Limine #9

Axanar Defense Motions – Motion in Limine to Exclude #1 (AKA Defense Motion in Limine #9)

Furthermore, Defendants’ Motion In Limine No. 9 to preclude Plaintiffs from introducing evidence as to the professional nature of Defendants’ Works: GRANTED

Plaintiffs’ Motions

Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine #1

Axanar Plaintiffs Motions in Limine to Exclude Evidence #1

Also, Motion in Limine No. 1: Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine to exclude altered financial statements and its contents: DENIED

Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine #2

Axanar Plaintiffs Motions in Limine to Exclude Evidence #2

So Motion in Limine No. 2: Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine to exclude evidence and arguments relating to versions for the potential fan film, Axanar, created by Defendants after litigation was filed: GRANTED

Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine #3

Axanar Plaintiffs Motions in Limine to Exclude Evidence #3

Furthermore, Motion in Limine No. 3: Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine to exclude evidence and testimony relating to public statements made by J.J. Abrams and Justin Lin: GRANTED

Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine #4

Axanar Plaintiffs Motions in Limine to Exclude Evidence #4

In addition, Motion in Limine No. 4: Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine to exclude testimony and documents from lay witness Reece Watkins: GRANTED

Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine #5

Axanar Plaintiffs Motions in Limine to Exclude Evidence #5

Furthermore, Motion in Limine No. 5: Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine to exclude testimony and documents from lay witness Jonathan Lane: GRANTED

Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine #6

Axanar Plaintiffs Motions in Limine to Exclude Evidence #6

Also Motion in Limine No. 6: Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine to exclude testimony and documents regarding Star Trek fan films: UNDER SUBMISSION

Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine #7

Axanar Plaintiffs Motions in Limine to Exclude Evidence #7

So Motion in Limine No. 7: : Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine to exclude the testimony and documents discussing Alec Peters’ unrelated work regarding Star Trek props: GRANTED

Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine #8

Axanar Plaintiffs Motions in Limine to Exclude Evidence #8

Furthermore, Motion in Limine No. 8: Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine to exclude testimony, documents, or other evidence created or made after the Complaint in this litigation was filed: GRANTED

Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine #9

Axanar Plaintiffs Motions in Limine to Exclude Evidence #9

In addition, Motion in Limine No. 9: Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine to exclude the testimony of Defendants’ expert Christian Tregillis: DENIED

Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine #10

Axanar Plaintiffs Motions in Limine to Exclude Evidence #10

Finally, Motion in Limine No. 10: Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine to exclude the testimony of Dr. Henry Jenkins: GRANTED

What Does it all Mean?

So most likely, what it means is that the judge has separated the wheat from the chaff with these Axanar Orders. First of all, he knocked out a lot of the discovery dispute, which makes sense, due to relevancy issues. Furthermore, by taking away the testimony of Messrs. Watkins and Lane, the ruling distills the case to its essence and eliminates extraneous noise. In addition, I admit taking Jenkins off the table surprised me, although he would have testified about fan films. Hence the judge has clarified: Axanar most likely won’t be seen as much of a fan film at trial. Furthermore, taking Abrams and Lin out of the equation also makes sense; again, the signal to noise ration has now improved. In addition, the same holds for defendant Peters’s past in the Props Department.

Defense Specifics

Also, denying defense’s MIL #2 yet granting their #3 may create a contradiction, we will probably see a clarification at a later date. Furthermore, granting defense’s #4 means triangular shapes won’t be raised. Yet granting defense’s #5 does not necessarily means Messrs. Gossett and McIntosh won’t testify at all. More likely, they will testify but not regarding the personal drama issue. Because, after all, they are both knowledgeable witnesses (however, the court might clarify this ruling and knock them out completely – we shall see).

Denying defense’s #7 and #8 means Star Trek goes front and center – and so do the financials. In addition, defendant Peters will likely have to explain the two separate financial statements to the jury. However, eliminating the question of professionalism may or may not go to market harm (which does not really need proving, as fair use was already tossed).

Plaintiffs’ Specifics

In addition, on the plaintiffs’ side, denying their #1 means (see the prior paragraph) defense must explain two separate financial statements and why they differ. In addition, granting their MIL #2 means the jury will likely only concern themselves with one version of the proposed film, and not the multiple scripts (although admittedly I have no idea which version). Furthermore, granting their #8 means newer statements, etc. are out (which could affect the later scripts and the like). Also, denying their #9 (which seemed a long shot to me) means Christian Tregellis will testify on the financials.

Finally, putting their #6 under submission means we will see some arguments (and documents) regarding the relevancy of any other fan works, e. g. Star Trek Continues, et al. Hence – yippee – more motions.

What’s Next?

What’s Next?

The following dates are coming up:

  • January 24, 2017 parties must file their proposed jury instructions
  • also, January 30, 2017 parties must file a Joint Statement of the case, no more than 3 pages in length
  • January 31, 2017 Trial

And of course the matter can still settle at any time. Therefore I thank you, as always, for your kind support.

Janet Gershen-Siegel

Jespah (Janet Gershen-Siegel) has been a fan of Star Trek since probably the first set of reruns of The Original Series. She has an eclectic background, including an undergraduate degree in Philosophy, a JD (she practiced insurance defense law for a few years in New York and is a lot happier since she retired from that in 1990), and a MS in Interactive Media, which is a real-live social media degree. Along the way, she has about a decade and a half of data analysis work under her belt and currently works as a blog coordinator for a high-end wedding blog and also as a blogger for hire (topics include diverse subjects like ad retargeting but also the nursing job market), and has a shingle out to work on social media presence, with a focus on independent authors as she is also a published science fiction author. Plus, she has been a community manager for a large Q & A website since 2002, which is before that existed as a job title. She was raised on Long Island so, when she is riled up, the accent gallops back out and she can sound like Fran Drescher with a law degree. She lives in Boston with her husband of over 20 years and more computers than they need. She can always be bribed with pie.

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

  • Advertisement