Expand the following panels for additional search options.

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.

Trademark valuation of global banking brands

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.

Court Declares Lost Profits Analysis ‘Goes Too Far’

Court says nontraditional lost profits theory goes “too far” as it assumes sales occurred pursuant to a license the parties negotiated but never actually executed and assumes revenue derived not only from patents-in-suit, but also related unpatented softw ...

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.

AstraZeneca AB v. Apotex Corp.

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.

Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc. v. NuVasive, Inc.

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.

Immersion Corp. v. HTC Corp.

Court says nontraditional lost profits theory goes “too far” as it assumes sales occurred pursuant to a license the parties negotiated but never actually executed and assumes revenue derived not only from patents-in-suit, but also related unpatented softw ...

Aqua Shield v. Inter Pool Cover Team

Federal Circuit finds district court erred when it considered infringer’s actual profits a royalty cap instead of doing a hypothetical inquiry into what parties would have anticipated and ordered court to consider evidence of gross profits on remand.

Ericsson, Inc. v. D-Link Corp. (II)

In dispute over infringement of standard-essential patent (SEP), Federal Circuit holds royalty must be apportioned to the value of the patented feature and must exclude any added value to the patented feature from standard’s widespread adoption.

EMVR Must Not Swallow Apportionment, Federal Circuit Says

Federal Circuit strikes award against Apple, finding it resulted from district court’s misstating the law on the entire market value rule and apportionment and court’s failure to serve as gatekeeper under Daubert and exclude unreliable damages testimony.

Expert’s Per-Unit Lost Profits Calculation Satisfies Daubert

Expert’s use of Panduit to show causation and reconstruct hypothetical market for lost profits analysis satisfies Daubert, court says; expert showed demand for patented product and provided method for calculating actual damages on per-unit basis.

VirnetX, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc. (II)

Federal Circuit strikes award against Apple, finding it resulted from district court’s misstating the law on the entire market value rule and apportionment and court’s failure to serve as gatekeeper under Daubert and exclude unreliable damages testimony.

Abandoning ‘Classic Way’ to Royalty Analysis, Expert Gets Lost

Court excludes royalty analysis veering from “classic way” in that expert used number of infringing products, not revenue, as royalty base and dollar amount, not percentage of the revenue, as royalty rate.

Roll-Rite, LLC v Shur-Co, LLC

Expert’s use of Panduit to show causation and reconstruct hypothetical market for lost profits analysis satisfies Daubert, court says; expert showed demand for patented product and provided method for calculating actual damages on per-unit basis.

Nash Bargaining Solution a ‘Non-Starter’ for Royalty Analysis

Under Daubert, court excludes royalty analysis that claims parties would have agreed to equal profit share, finding it was based on the discredited Nash Bargaining Solution, a “non-starter in a world where damages must be tied to the facts of the case.”

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.

May Expert Use Valuation With Unknown Discounts for Royalty Analysis?

Court says no requirement exists that expert’s royalty analysis only consider transactions that are both technologically and economically comparable and finds Daubert allows for a reasonable royalty calculation based on a valuation of patent in suit embed ...

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.

Sloan Valve Company v. Zurn Industries, Inc.

Court excludes royalty analysis veering from “classic way” in that expert used number of infringing products, not revenue, as royalty base and dollar amount, not percentage of the revenue, as royalty rate.

Inexact Apportionment Invalidates Expert’s Royalty Calculation

Court excludes plaintiff expert testimony under Daubert, finding both the expert’s royalty base and rate determinations fatally flawed due to the expert’s inexact apportionment; in valuing damages, he failed to compensate only for the infringement caused ...

101 - 125 of 309 results