Joyce v. Armstrong Teasdale, LLP (II)

BVLaw
Full Text of Court Cases
September 26, 2012

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. (2,040 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
7372 Prepackaged Software
511210 Software Publishers
intellectual property
Joyce v. Armstrong Teasdale, LLP (II)
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137905
US
Federal Court
Missouri
United States District Court
Stephen Weeks (plaintiff)
Jackson

Summary

Expert’s supplement report to comply with recent case law concerning sufficiency of proof to prove damages in patent cases fails for lack of qualitative evidence and comparable licenses.
Joyce v. Armstrong Teasdale, LLP (II)
PDF, Size: 39 KB

See Also

Patent Experts Have Limited Latitude to Comply With New Damages Standards

Legal and Court Case Update
January 2013

Expert’s present value calculus for patented software fails to meet post-trial federal decisions on evidentiary standards for proving damages in patent cases, but the court grants leave to “repair” the report to conform to new standards.

This article also appears in:
Intellectual Property Valuation Case Law Compendium, Fourth Edition
The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages, Seventh Edition
Daubert Challenges: The Courts Raise the Bar