Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Supreme Court Obfuscates Design Patent Damages Issue

Supreme Court agrees with Samsung that design patent infringement damages statute (Section 289) does not per se require infringer to pay profits from entire product but can be limited to profits from component(s) to which the protected design was applied.

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

Supreme Court agrees with Samsung that design patent infringement damages statute (Section 289) does not per se require infringer to pay profits from entire product but can be limited to profits from component(s) to which the protected design was applied.

Supreme Court Obfuscates Design Patent Damages Issue

Supreme Court agrees with Samsung that design patent infringement damages statute (Section 289) does not per se require infringer to pay profits from entire product but can be limited to profits from component(s) to which the protected design was applied.

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.

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

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.

Samsung’s About-Face on Off-the-Market Lost Profits Calculation

Based on prior ruling requiring that analysis of off-the-market lost profits consider potential design-arounds as of the date of first infringement rather than the notice, court rejects Samsung’s pretrial motion to preclude calculation of Apple’s expert.

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

Based on prior ruling requiring that analysis of off-the-market lost profits consider potential design-arounds as of the date of first infringement rather than the notice, court rejects Samsung’s pretrial motion to preclude calculation of Apple’s expert.

Apple Fails in Last-Ditch Effort to Offer Nonexpert Lost Profits Theory

District court grants Samsung’s emergency motion to preclude Apple from introducing a lost profits theory for several patents that runs counter to the Panduit-based damages model its own experts had developed, calling the new, non-expert alternative theor ...

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

District court grants Samsung’s emergency motion to preclude Apple from introducing a lost profits theory for several patents that runs counter to the Panduit-based damages model its own experts had developed, calling the new, non-expert alternative theor ...

Expert’s ‘Aggressive’ Damages Theory Necessitates New Trial

In patent case, federal court strikes $450 million from $1 billion award and orders a new damages trial, finding the plaintiff’s expert used an improper, “aggressive,” notice date regarding some patents and the jury awarded impermissible forms of compensa ...

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

In patent case, federal court strikes $450 million from $1 billion award and orders a new damages trial, finding the plaintiff’s expert used an improper, “aggressive,” notice date regarding some patents and the jury awarded impermissible forms of compensa ...

What It Takes to Succeed on a Patent Apportionment Analysis

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.

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.

Last-Minute Efforts to Save Patent Claims Sans Damages Experts

After excluding the parties’ damages experts under Daubert, the court finds no credible evidence remains to support their claims for patent infringement, damages, or equitable relief (either permanent injunctions or prospective royalties).

Patent Damages Disabled by Poorly Designed Surveys

Federal court dismisses all the damages expert in the case, for both parties, for failure to calculate damages based on reliable consumer surveys and the “real world” cost of infringement alternatives.

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

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.

Fractus, S.A. v. Samsung Electronics Co.

Court affirms $23 million patent infringement award based on apportionment analysis of the plaintiff’s expert, which relied on internal as well as external documentation of value of patented technology without improperly invoking entire market value of in ...

Apple, Inc. v. Motorola Mobility, Inc. (II)

After excluding the parties’ damages experts under Daubert, the court finds no credible evidence remains to support their claims for patent infringement, damages, or equitable relief (either permanent injunctions or prospective royalties).

Apple, Inc. v. Motorola Mobility, Inc. (I)

Federal court dismisses all the damages expert in the case, for both parties, for failure to calculate damages based on reliable consumer surveys and the “real world” cost of infringement alternatives.

Lost Profits for Lost Sales and Price Erosion Considered

The U.S. Court of Federal Appeals affirmed an award of lost profits for patent infringement and price erosion. It found that the award was established by testimony from a CPA who established the markets using sound economic evidence, even though it was ba ...

Ericsson, Inc. v. Harris Corp.

The U.S. Court of Federal Appeals affirmed an award of lost profits for patent infringement and price erosion. It found that the award was established by testimony from a CPA who established the markets using sound economic evidence, even though it was ba ...

In re General Instrument Litig.

At issue is the admittance of expert testimony.

Lay Opinion Stricken Under FRE 701

One of the issues raised in this partial summary judgment motion in a consolidated derivative action is the admissibility of lay opinion testimony under FRE 701.

23 results