LaserDynamics, Inc. v. Quanta Computer, Inc. (V)
Federal Circuit requires the apportionment analysis for patent infringement claims to focus on the “smallest saleable unit.”
Ergotron, Inc. v. Rubbermaid Commercial Products, LLC
Federal district court finds “multitudinous” Georgia-Pacific factors allow for flexibility and permissible degree of imprecision in expert’s royalty rate analysis.
ActiveVideo Networks, Inc. v. Verizon Communications, Inc.
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)
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)
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 ...
Illinois Tool Works, Inc. v. MOC Products Co., Inc.
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)
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.