Brocade Communications Systems, Inc. v. A10 Networks, Inc. (I)

Expert’s Apportionment Cannot Save Flawed Royalty Calculation

District court vacates patent damages because of expert’s use of the entire market value for reasonable royalty calculation, where the patented features did not drive consumer demand; apportionment of damages between the product’s patented and unpatented ...

Gallagher & Co. v. Babcock

Court Rejects Expert’s ‘Irrelevant’ Theory of Damages

Fifth Circuit vacates lost profits award because expert’s calculation was based on all clients who left plaintiffs after the defendants’ breach of non-compete agreements, rather than those who followed the defendants to their new place of employment; the ...

Carnegie Mellon University v. Marvell Technology Group (IV)

Lack of License Negotiation Experience Does Not Disqualify Expert

District court finds plaintiff’s expert qualified to testify to reasonable royalty calculation under Third Circuit’s liberal interpretation of Daubert despite lack of actual experience negotiating patent licenses; a hypothetical negotiation has no applica ...

In re Novatel Wireless Securities Litigation

Inclusion of Inflated Purchase Price Does Not Doom Damages Calculation

District court finds expert’s damages calculation in securities case is not unreliable simply because it incorporates inflated purchase; expert also performed an event study and regression analysis to assess the effect of misrepresentation on inflated pri ...

Carnegie Mellon University v. Marvell Technology Group (III)

In Billion-Dollar IP Case, Expert’s Mention of Total Revenue Does Not Violate Uniloc

District court denies defendants’ pretrial motion claiming expert failed to consider non-infringing alternatives in her apportionment analysis and affirms Daubert ruling in favor of plaintiff.

RMD, LLC v. Nitto Americas, Inc.

Expert’s Unconventional Method to Forecast Lost Profits Satisfies Daubert

Federal district court finds plaintiff’s expert’s Crystal Ball and Holt Winters methodology to project lost profits admissible under Daubert; method proved reasonable when subsequently tested with regression analysis tool.

Joyce v. Armstrong Teasdale, LLP (II)

Patent Experts Have Limited Latitude to Comply With New Damages Standards

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.

LaserDynamics, Inc. v. Quanta Computer, Inc. (V)

Federal Circuit Restricts Patent Damages to ‘Smallest Salable Infringing Unit’

Federal Circuit requires the apportionment analysis for patent infringement claims to focus on the “smallest saleable unit.”

ActiveVideo Networks, Inc. v. Verizon Communications, Inc.

May IP Experts Rely on Post Hoc Licenses in Calculating Royalties?

Federal Circuit affirms $115 million damages award for infringement, affirming expert’s reliance on a licensing agreement that took place two years past the date of the hypothetical negotiation.

Carnegie Mellon University v. Marvell Technology Group (I)

In Billion-Dollar IP Case, Expert’s Mention of Total Revenue Does Not Violate Uniloc

District court rejects defendants’ Daubert challenge finding plaintiff’s expert’s reference to total revenue was legitimate starting point of apportionment analysis and did not amount to use of Entire Market Value Rule.

Carnegie Mellon University v. Marvell Technology Group (II)

In Billion-Dollar IP Case, Expert’s Mention of Total Revenue Does Not Violate Uniloc

District court rejects plaintiff’s Daubert challenge finding defendants’ expert may “inaugurate” reasonable royalty analysis by referring to plaintiff’s existing licenses; however, licenses did not demonstrate an established royalty considering their lack ...

In re Jonatzke

Flawed Expert Opinion Drastically Diminishes Plaintiff’s Lost Profits

Bankruptcy court substantially reduces plaintiff’s damages claim based largely on expert’s failure to independently verify assumptions regarding defendant’s alleged theft of trade secrets on lost profits and lost sales.

Illinois Tool Works, Inc. v. MOC Products Co., Inc.

Damages Expert Can Assume But Not Opine as to Market Share

Federal court permits damages expert to assume the plaintiff’s 50% market share in calculating lost profits, based on information from a technical expert, but disallows him from offering an opinion that the plaintiff in fact held a 50% share, for lack of ...

Joyce v. Armstrong Teasdale, LLP (I)

Patent Experts Have Limited Latitude to Comply With New Damages Standards

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.

System Development Integration, LLC v. Computer Sciences Corp.

Ibbotson-Derived Discount Rate Subject to Daubert

Court disallows expert theory of “lost opportunity cost” damages for breach of contract, but admits his “standard” lost profits analysis, including reliance on agreed-upon forecasts and an Ibbotson-derived the discount rate.

Whitserve, LLC v. Computer Packages, Inc.

Federal Circuit Discredits Expert for Using ‘Discarded’ 25% Rule

Federal Circuit reverses $8.3 million award because expert used the “now discarded” 25% rule of thumb and conducted a “superficial” Georgia-Pacific analysis to reach unrealistic conclusions.

Sugar Hill, LLC v. United States

Is Valuation Expert Allowed to Derive Key Rates for Real Property Appraisal?

To value a company that owns real property, business appraisers frequently rely on third-party appraisals by presumably qualified experts. In a recent twist, in this case, the real estate appraiser relied on components of value, including occupancy and ma ...

TXCO Resources, Inc. v. Peregrine Petroleum, LLC (In re: TXCO Resources, Inc.)

Road Map for Reasonable Royalty in Oil and Gas Trade Secrets Case

Court denies lost profits damages for trade secret misappropriation in oil and gas case, but calculates $15.8 million reasonable royalty award based on prior “licenses” (farmout and joint exploration agreements) that were particular to the plaintiff and c ...

Basile Baumann Prost Cole & Assoc. v. BBP & Assoc. LLC

Damages Expert May Only Assume Facts in Evidence

Court strikes expert’s “lost asset value” theory of damages for trademark infringement because it relied entirely on the plaintiff’s allegations that it lost all of its goodwill value due to the defendants’ actions, without adequate proof.

Hubbard v. BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc.

Securities Fraud Also Requires ‘Precise’ Apportionment Analysis

11th Circuit confirms reversal of securities fraud violation by Florida-based bank, based on failure by the plaintiff’s financial expert to apportion the amount of stock losses between the alleged fraud and other market and industry risks, particularly th ...

Natchez Regional Medical Center v. Quorum Health Resources, LLC

Daubert Does Not Require Certification for Damages Expert

Court affirms that Daubert does not require an expert to be certified in accounting or another specialty, so long as he/she possesses the requisite knowledge and experience; and it admits testimony of hospital turnaround and restructuring expert in case a ...

Brocade Communications Systems, Inc. v. A10 Networks, Inc. (III)

Order on motions in limine and Daubert motions.

Real View, LLC v. 20-20 Technologies (I)

‘Value of Use’ in Copyright Infringement Cases Is Still ‘Difficult’ and ‘Evolving’

Federal district court excludes hypothetical royalty for copyrighted software based on expert’s failure to rely on any comparable licenses or adequately explain their differences from his estimated 35% rate.

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

Patent Expert Asserts Flawed License and Legal Conclusions

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.

Heritage Operating, LP v. Rhine Bros. LLC

Expert’s Evidence Is Key to Reversing a Zero Damages Verdict

Texas Court of Appeals enforces a ten-year non-compete agreement as to an owner selling a business; it also reverses a jury award of zero lost profits damages after finding the plaintiff’s expert offered reliable evidence of lost customer contracts and sa ...