Trial Court Misinterprets Damages Rules for Design Patent Violation

Business Valuation UpdateVol. 21 No. 12
Legal and Court Case Update
December 2015

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. (1,657 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
3569 General Industrial Machinery and Equipment, NEC
333999 All Other Miscellaneous General Purpose Machinery Manufacturing
intellectual property
damages, lost profits, patent infringement, expert testimony, reasonable royalty, apportionment
Nordock, Inc. v. Systems, Inc.
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 17117
September 29, 2015
US
Federal Court
Federal Circuit
United States Court of Appeals
Dr. Stan V. Smith (plaintiff); Richard F. Bero (defendant)
O’Malley

Summary

Federal Circuit rejects design patent infringement award where prevailing expert improperly apportioned the infringer’s profits and jury failed to determine infringer’s profits but, against the weight of the evidence, simply stated they equaled zero.

See Also

Nordock, Inc. v. Systems, Inc.

Full Text of Court Cases
September 29, 2015

Federal Circuit rejects design patent infringement award where prevailing expert improperly apportioned the infringer’s profits and jury failed to determine infringer’s profits but, against the weight of the evidence, simply stated they equaled zero.

This article also appears in:
Business Valuation UpdateVol. 21 No. 12
The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages, Seventh Edition