BVR's Guide to Intellectual Property Valuation, Second Edition
March 2012 ISBN#: 978-1-935081-60-9 Hardcover, PDF (367 pages)
Michael Pellegrino
Business Valuation Resources, LLC
BVR Legal and Court Case Yearbook 2015
February 2015 978-1-62150-047-6 PDF (262 pages)
BVR (editor)
Business Valuation Resources, LLC
Business Valuation Update Yearbook 2015
February 2015 978-1-62150-048-3 PDF
BVR (editor)
Business Valuation Resources, LLC
Royalty Rates in Biotech: BVR's Guide to Full-Text Licensing Agreements
June 2010 978-1-935081-36-4 Softcover
BVR (editor)
Business Valuation Resources, LLC
Guide to Intangible Asset Valuation
November 2014 Hardcover (784 pages)
Robert F. Reilly, Robert P. Schweihs
AICPA
Commonwealth Sci. & Indus. Research Organisation v. Cisco Sys.
Federal Circuit invalidates infringement award where trial court’s damages model failed to filter out value to the patent in suit accruing from its being essential to wireless standard and failed to adjust its Georgia-Pacific analysis for standardization.
BVR/ktMINE Royalty Rate Benchmarking Guide, 2017/2018 Global Edition
October 2017 PDF
Business Valuation Resources, LLC
ktMINE Royalty Rate Comparables & Full Text Licensing Agreements Database
Business Valuation Update
Akamai Techs., Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc.
Federal Circuit upholds lost profits award based on adjusted market share analysis, finding expert accounted for huge price disparity between patentee’s product and infringer’s product and based market elasticity discount on sound economic principles.
Deflecto, LLC v. Dundas Jafine Inc.
Court calls Daubert challenger’s attack on expert’s lost profits opinion “misguided”; it unduly focuses on expert’s familiarity with legal standards and fails to explain what is wrong with expert’s use of software program for projecting future damages.
Complex Facts Test Patent Experts’ Apportionment Skills
Court admits apportionment based on lines of infringing code and on value defendant places on product features in accused products but excludes apportionment using forward citation analysis for failure to show value of asserted patents in marketplace.
Nordock, Inc. v. Systems, Inc.
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.
Uncritical Use of Royalty Rate Data Spoils Damages Opinion
Court excludes most of damages testimony under Daubert because expert based reasonable royalty calculation on data from IP databases and publications without subjecting information to rigorous analysis and establishing its relevance to case at hand.
Federal Circuit Sweeps Aside Lost Profits Theories and Award
Federal Circuit strikes down lost profits where patentee does not practice patents and fails to qualify for convoyed sales because of missing functional relationship between nonpatented parts it sells to related company and latter’s patented products.
Federal Circuit Resists Samsung’s ‘Quest for Apportionment’
Federal Circuit rejects Samsung’s call for apportioning damages related to design patent infringement, saying the proposed treatment would conflict with the express language of the applicable statute; court upholds most of $1 billion award to Apple.
Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat Systems, Inc. (I)
Court admits apportionment based on lines of infringing code and on value defendant places on product features in accused products but excludes apportionment using forward citation analysis for failure to show value of asserted patents in marketplace.
Federal Circuit Weighs Use of EMVR in Pharmaceutical Case
Federal Circuit affirms award of 50% of gross margin, finding that, even though the entire market value rule is not per se inapplicable in the pharmaceutical context, it does not apply in this case because patents cover the entire infringing product.