IceMOS Tech. Corp. v. Omron Corp.
In contract dispute, court denies defendant’s Daubert motions, finding plaintiff’s experts are qualified based on extensive experience in relevant industry; experts could provide testimony relevant to surviving lost development support costs claim and their testimony is not unreliable as of now.
Plaintiff’s Projections Fail to Meet New York Test for Lost Profits or Lost Business Value
A breach of contract case in which the plaintiff asked for various types of economic damages is noteworthy for the court s extended discussion of what the plaintiff must show under New York law to make a case for lost profits. The court explained that the hurdle was particularly high for a new business or a business trying to break into a new market considering the company s lack of a financial track record. Damages must be ...
IceMOS Tech. Corp. v. Omron Corp.
In contract dispute, court says claims for lost profits and lost business value fail because, for both, plaintiff is unable to determine damages with reasonable certainty; relying solely on projections of future performance, without any proof of profit, is not enough under New York law.
Plaintiff’s Projections Fail to Meet New York Test for Lost Profits or Lost Business Value
A breach of contract case in which the plaintiff asked for various types of economic damages is noteworthy for the court s extended discussion of what the plaintiff must show under New York law to make a case for lost profits. The court explained that the hurdle was particularly high for a new business or a business trying to break into a new market considering the company s lack of a financial track record. Damages must be ...
‘Real-World Market Evidence’ Does Not Support Dissenters’ Damages Claim, Chancery Says
Chancery says plaintiffs proved directors breached fiduciary duties and duty to disclose but failed to prove damages; court rejects plaintiff experts’ DCF analysis, noting problematic projections and beta; “real-world market evidence” shows company was not worth more than deal price.
In re PLX Tech. Stockholders Litig.
Chancery says plaintiffs proved directors breached fiduciary duties and duty to disclose but failed to prove damages; court rejects plaintiff expert's DCF analysis, noting problematic projections and beta; “real-world market evidence” shows company was not worth more than deal price.
Adjusted Merger Price Superior to Other Valuation Methods
In appraisal arbitrage case, Chancery finds merger price adjusted for synergies is best indicator of fair value of company; dissenter’s DCF value rests on unsound management projections and its comparable transactions analysis uses too few data points.
LongPath Capital, LLC v. Ramtron International Corp.
In appraisal arbitrage case, Chancery finds merger price adjusted for synergies is best indicator of fair value of company; dissenter’s DCF value rests on unsound management projections and its comparable transactions analysis uses too few data points.
Expert’s Solid DCF and Industry Research Sway Court
Court discredits respondent expert’s capitalization of earnings calculation and market-based analysis, noting “severe deficiencies” and instead adopts petitioner expert’s valuation but applies DLOM to entire equity value, not just goodwill.
Wright v. Irish (Hudson Valley Clean Energy, Inc.)
Court discredits respondent expert’s capitalization of earnings calculation and market-based analysis, noting “severe deficiencies” and instead adopts petitioner expert’s valuation but applies DLOM to entire equity value, not just goodwill.
Can You Trust a Valuation That Falls Short of AICPA Standards?
Appeals court finds error in trial court’s refusal to value business; even if limited data caused expert’s estimate to fall short of AICPA standard, it was based on the market approach, a “sound and reasonable method to value a closely-held business.”
‘Stand-Alone’ Lost Profits Claim Sinks, as Does Expert Opinion
In lost licensing opportunity suit, court excludes damages opinion where expert failed to vet assumptions in plaintiff’s business plan; issue is to determine market value of loss not lost profits as such.
Hugh v. Hugh
Appeals court finds error in trial court’s refusal to value business; even if limited data caused expert’s estimate to fall short of AICPA standard, it was based on the market approach, a “sound and reasonable method to value a closely-held business.”
Mosaid Technologies Inc. v. LSI Corp.
In lost licensing opportunity suit, court excludes damages opinion where expert failed to vet assumptions in plaintiff’s business plan; issue is to determine market value of loss not lost profits as such.
Expert’s ‘Dollar-for-Dollar’ Damages Theory Short of Factual Support
In a patent case, in a pretrial ruling, the court finds the plaintiff cannot claim direct harm for lost revenues its foreign subsidiary sustained because of the defendants’ infringement by relying on expert testimony that equated the value of the injury d ...
Volterra Semiconductor Corp. v. Primarion, Inc.
In a patent case, in a pretrial ruling, the court finds the plaintiff cannot claim direct harm for lost revenues its foreign subsidiary sustained because of the defendants’ infringement by relying on expert testimony that equated the value of the injury d ...
Claims Court Rules IRC Section 409A Governs Discounted Stock Option
Claims court disagrees with taxpayers claiming that issue of whether an option to buy stock in company was discounted was not relevant to finding no taxpayer liability under IRC section 409A; if the option was discounted¬—a factual issue awaiting determin ...
Failure to Analyze Settlement Agreement Dooms Damages Theory
Federal court grants defendant’s Daubert motion to exclude plaintiff’s damages testimony, because the expert failed to show how a single “comparable” settlement agreement that covered a different patent was a reliable basis for his reasonable royalty calc ...
Difficulty in Calculating Royalty Base No Defense Under Daubert
In Daubert challenge, district court finds expert misapplied entire market value rule (EMVR) in royalty calculation; although he used the “smallest saleable unit” featuring patented device, he did not account for unit’s other components in determining a r ...
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 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.
Sutardja v. United States
Claims court disagrees with taxpayers claiming that issue of whether an option to buy stock in company was discounted was not relevant to finding no taxpayer liability under IRC section 409A; if the option was discounted¬—a factual issue awaiting determin ...
AVM Technologies, LLC v. Intel Corporation (II)
Federal court grants defendant’s Daubert motion to exclude plaintiff’s damages testimony, because the expert failed to show how a single “comparable” settlement agreement that covered a different patent was a reliable basis for his reasonable royalty calc ...
Michigan Court on Double Dipping in Divorce: ‘It Depends’
State spousal support statute does not flatly forbid double dipping, but requires courts to consider all circumstances of a particular case and principles of fairness, appellate court rules.
AVM Technologies, LLC v. Intel Corporation (I)
In Daubert challenge, district court finds expert misapplied entire market value rule (EMVR) in royalty calculation; although he used the “smallest saleable unit” featuring patented device, he did not account for unit’s other components in determining a r ...