Daubert Ruling on How to Satisfy Apportionment When Using Benchmark Licenses
Allowing that apportionment is “inherently imprecise,” court says damages expert’s supplemental report shows that the apportionment underlying three benchmark licenses aligns with the expert’s royalty rate in the hypothetical license; expert’s royalty opinion is admissible under Daubert.
Bio Rad Labs. v. 10X Genomics, Inc. (II)
Allowing that apportionment is “inherently imprecise,” court says damages expert’s supplemental report shows that the apportionment underlying three benchmark licenses aligns with the expert’s royalty rate in the hypothetical license; expert’s royalty opinion is admissible under Daubert.
Daubert Ruling on How to Satisfy Apportionment When Using Benchmark Licenses
Court finds plaintiff expert’s lost profits calculation regarding two-supplier market is inadmissible and rejects reasonable royalty to the extent expert failed to explain how apportionment in benchmark licenses relates to expert’s hypothetical license.
Bio Rad Labs. v. 10X Genomics, Inc. (I)
Court finds plaintiff expert’s lost profits calculation regarding two-supplier market is inadmissible and rejects reasonable royalty to the extent expert failed to explain how apportionment in benchmark licenses relates to expert’s hypothetical license.
Court Validates Use of IPO Valuation in Fair Value Proceeding
In shareholder suit involving pharmaceutical startup with uncertain prospects, appeals court upholds trial court’s rejection of expert testimony based on “traditional” valuation methods in favor of noncontemporary IPO valuation to determine fair value.
Kottayil v. Insys Therapeutics, Inc.
In shareholder suit involving pharmaceutical startup with uncertain prospects, appeals court upholds trial court’s rejection of expert testimony based on “traditional” valuation methods in favor of noncontemporary IPO valuation to determine fair value.
Court Validates Use of IPO Valuation in Fair Value Proceeding
In shareholder suit involving pharmaceutical startup with uncertain prospects, appeals court upholds trial court’s rejection of expert testimony based on “traditional” valuation methods in favor of noncontemporary IPO valuation to determine fair value.
Attorney Malpractice Resulted in $30 Million Lost Profits Award
The California Court of Appeal, 1st District, reversed a $30 million damages award in this attorney malpractice action.
Kairos Scientific Inc. v. Fish & Richardson, P.C.
The California Court of Appeal, 1st District, reversed a $30 million damages award in this attorney malpractice action.