Case Information
*1 Case 3:20-cv-04688-RS Document 633 Filed 08/22/25 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ANIBAL RODRIGUEZ, et al., Case No. 20-cv-04688-RS Plaintiffs,
v. ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 15 GOOGLE LLC, Defendant.
Defendant moves in limine to preclude Plaintiffs from introducing evidence, demonstratives, or argument featuring unjust enrichment opinions that Google contends Plaintiffs’ expert buried in a footnote of a supplemental report. See Dkt. No. 613. Plaintiffs respond that the opinions result, not from new methods, but rather from the reality that Defendant’s financial disclosures leave open to estimation certain details about the later years of the class period.
The motion is granted in part and denied in part. It is granted such that Plaintiffs must amend their demonstratives, evidence, and argument to reflect Lasinski’s actual conclusion in his report, which was a range from $1.498 billion to $1.726 billion. Any reference to his footnote and disputed supplemental schedules must identify them as merely alternative calculations that rest on his own assumptions about costs for the latter years of the class period.
IT IS SO ORDERED . *2 Case 3:20-cv-04688-RS Document 633 Filed 08/22/25 Page 2 of 2 Dated: August 22, 2025
______________________________________ RICHARD SEEBORG Chief United States District Judge
O RDER ON D EFENDANT ’ S M OTION IN L IMINE N O . 15 C ASE N O . 20-cv-04688-RS
2