Arctic Cat v. Sabertooth Motor Group

BVLaw
Full Text of Court Cases
August 9, 2016

Access the Full Article

This article and its downloads are available with a subscription to any of these products:
It is also available in these products:
Already a subscriber or product owner?  Login
This article is also available for purchase. (4,426 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
5571 Motorcycle Dealers
441228 Motorcycle, ATV, and All Other Motor Vehicle Dealers
intellectual property
trademark infringement, daubert, expert testimony, admissibility, reasonable royalty, rule 702, reliability, license agreement
Arctic Cat v. Sabertooth Motor Group
2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105583
US
Federal Court
Minnesota
United States District Court
Unknown (plaintiff); Melissa Snelson (defendants)
Tunheim

Summary

Court says prior licensing agreements undergirding expert’s hypothetical reasonable royalty have no bearing on what the parties would have negotiated for the ...
Arctic Cat v. Sabertooth Motor Group
PDF, Size: 138 KB

See Also

Court Nixes Royalty Calculation Relying on Unalike Prior Licenses

Court Case Digests
August 9, 2016

Court says prior licensing agreements undergirding expert’s hypothetical reasonable royalty have no bearing on what the parties would have negotiated for the trademark in dispute; court finds calculation too speculative to assist jury and excludes it.

This article also appears in:
Intellectual Property Valuation Case Law Compendium, Fourth Edition
The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages, Seventh Edition