ORDER

JOHN ANTOON, II, District Judge.

This cause is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Strike the Declaration of Stefan V. Stein (Doc. 36) and Defendants' Response in Opposition (Doc. 39) thereto. In the motion, Plaintiff seeks exclusion of a declaration filed by Defendants in support of Defendants' asserted claim construction in this patent suit.

Plaintiff argues that the declarant, Stefan V. Stein—a patent lawyer—does not qualify as one of skill in the art, that he offers only legal opinions and argument as to how this Court should construe the terms of the patent, and that therefore his declaration should be struck. The Court agrees. In Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 52 F.3d 967 (Fed. Cir. 1995), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit explained that testimony of the inventor and patent attorney about how claims should be construed was "entitled to no deference" because it "amounts to no more than legal opinion—it is precisely the process of construction that the court must undertake." Id. at 983. "[A]s to these types of opinions, the court has complete discretion to adopt the expert legal opinion as its own, to find guidance from it, or to ignore it entirely, or even to exclude it." Id.

Mr. Stein's Declaration (Doc. 34-6) provides only legal opinion and argument as to the meaning of the claim term at issue. Such argument may be made by Defendants' attorney on the issue of claim construction, but Mr. Stein's Declaration is not competent extrinsic evidence. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Strike the Declaration of Stefan V. Stein (Doc. 36) is GRANTED. The Declaration shall not be considered by the Court; however, the Clerk of Court need not remove it from the record.

DONE and ORDERED.