Failure to Object to Jury Award Loses Potential Millions in Royalties

Business Valuation UpdateVol. 15 No. 8
Legal and Court Case Update
August 2009

Access the Full Article

This article is available with a subscription to any of these products:
It is also available in this product:
Already a subscriber or product owner?  Login
This article is also available for purchase. (745 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
3841 Surgical and Medical Instruments and Apparatus
339112 Surgical and Medical Instrument Manufacturing
intellectual property
DePuy Spine, Inc. v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc.
2009 WL 1529603 (C. A. Fed. (Mass.)
June 1, 2009
US
Federal Court
Federal Circuit
United States Court of Appeals
André J Bahou, Calvin P Griffith, Dirk D Thomas, Greer N Shaw, Gregory A Castanias, John K Warren, Lauren B Fletcher, Luke L Dauchot, Mark C Fleming, Patrick J Norton, Richard W O'Neill, Seth P Waxman, Sydenham B Alexander, Timothy R Shannon, William G Mc
Linn

Summary

Plaintiff keeps lost profits for patent infringement, but loses damages for “pull through” products and also millions in reasonable royalties, for failure to timely object to inconsistent jury verdict.

See Also

DePuy Spine, Inc. v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc.

Full Text of Court Cases
June 1, 2009

Plaintiff keeps lost profits for patent infringement, but loses damages for “pull through” products and also millions in reasonable royalties, for failure to timely object to inconsistent jury verdict.

This article also appears in:
Business Valuation UpdateVol. 15 No. 8
The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages, Seventh Edition