Georgia-Pacific Analysis Satisfies Apportionment Requirement, Court Says

Business Valuation UpdateVol. 23 No. 5
BVLaw Case Update
May 2017
3799 Transportation Equipment, NEC
336999 All Other Transportation Equipment Manufacturing
intellectual property
damages, lost profits, daubert, admissibility, georgia-pacific, reasonable royalty, panduit, apportionment, non-infringing alternative

Bombardier Rec. Prods. v. Arctic Cat Inc.
2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26517
February 24, 2017
US
Federal Court
Minnesota
United States District Court
Claude Gelinas, Keith R. Ugone (plaintiffs); unknown (defendants)
Tunheim

Summary

Court rejects Daubert challenge to lost profits and reasonable royalty analyses; court downplays importance of Panduit noninfringing-alternatives requirement and equates Georgia-Pacific analysis with apportionment between patented and unpatented features.

See Also

Georgia-Pacific Analysis Satisfies Apportionment Requirement, Court Says

Court rejects Daubert challenge to lost profits and reasonable royalty analyses; court downplays importance of Panduit noninfringing-alternatives requirement and equates Georgia-Pacific analysis with apportionment between patented and unpatented features.