Patent Expert Asserts Flawed License and Legal Conclusions

Business Valuation UpdateVol. 18 No. 10
Legal and Court Case Update
October 2012

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. (1,220 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
4813 Telephone Communications, Except Radiotelephone
334220 Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing
intellectual property
Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. (I)
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90877
June 30, 2012
US
Federal Court
California
United States District Court
Terry Musika (plaintiff); Michael Wagner (defendant)
Koh

Summary

Federal district court precludes defendant’s expert from apportioning damages for infringement of a design patent (as opposed to utility patent) as contrary to the statutory remedy, but denies most Daubert objections against the plaintiff’s expert.

See Also

Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. (I)

Full Text of Court Cases
June 30, 2012

Federal district court precludes defendant’s expert from apportioning damages for infringement of a design patent (as opposed to utility patent) as contrary to the statutory remedy, but denies most Daubert objections against the plaintiff’s expert.

This article also appears in:
Business Valuation UpdateVol. 18 No. 10
The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages, Seventh Edition