Meridian Mfg. v. C&B Mfg.

BVLaw
Full Text of Court Cases
October 5, 2018

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. (16,839 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
3523 Farm Machinery and Equipment
333111 Farm Machinery and Equipment Manufacturing
intellectual property
royalty rate, daubert, admissibility, economic damages & lost profits, georgia-pacific, reasonable royalty, rule 702, reliability, hypothetical negotiation, license agreement
Meridian Mfg. v. C&B Mfg.
2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172243
US
Federal Court
Iowa
United States District Court
Zach Eubank (plaintiff); Carol Ludington (defendant)
Strand

Summary

Court admits expert opinion that reasonable royalty cannot exceed cost of developing noninfringing alternative because opinion is based on facts of the case; court excludes opposing expert’s royalty because he failed to assess comparability of selected licenses to patented technology.
Meridian Mfg. v. C&B Mfg.
PDF, Size: 540 KB

See Also

Underdeveloped Comparability Analysis Means Exclusion of Reasonable Royalty Opinion

Court Case Digests
October 5, 2018

Court admits expert opinion that reasonable royalty cannot exceed cost of developing noninfringing alternative because opinion is based on facts of the case; court excludes opposing expert’s royalty because he failed to assess comparability of selected licenses to patented technology.

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