Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Infringer’s Call for Apportionment of Lost Profits Goes Unheeded

Federal Circuit denies defendants’ request for rehearing en banc on issue of whether lost profits award was improper because calculation involving a multicomponent product required apportionment analysis in addition to satisfaction of Panduit factors.

Infringer’s Call for Apportionment of Lost Profits Goes Unheeded

Federal Circuit rejects challenge to lost profits award; patentee showed entitlement to lost profits from whole product by satisfying Panduit; although infringing product had multiple components, further apportionment in this case was not necessary.

Federal Circuit drills down into Panduit, apportionment, and lost profits

The Federal Circuit recently examined a paramount damages issue that comes up in patent cases: whether, in terms of calculating lost profits, the patent holder’s ability to meet the Panduit factors makes a separate apportionment analysis unnecessary.

Infringer’s Call for Apportionment of Lost Profits Goes Unheeded

Federal Circuit denies defendants’ request for rehearing en banc on issue of whether lost profits award was improper because calculation involving a multicomponent product required apportionment analysis in addition to satisfaction of Panduit factors.

Mentor Graphics Corp. v. EVE-USA, Inc. (II)

Federal Circuit denies defendants’ request for rehearing en banc on issue of whether lost profits award was improper because calculation involving a multicomponent product required apportionment analysis in addition to satisfaction of Panduit factors.

Georgia-Pacific Analysis Satisfies Apportionment Requirement, Court Says

Court rejects Daubert challenge to lost profits and reasonable royalty analyses; court downplays importance of Panduit noninfringing-alternatives requirement and equates Georgia-Pacific analysis with apportionment between patented and unpatented features.

Mentor Graphics Corp. v. EVE-USA, Inc. (I)

Federal Circuit rejects challenge to lost profits award; patentee showed entitlement to lost profits from whole product by satisfying Panduit; although infringing product had multiple components, further apportionment in this case was not necessary.

Infringer’s Call for Apportionment of Lost Profits Goes Unheeded

Federal Circuit rejects challenge to lost profits award; patentee showed entitlement to lost profits from whole product by satisfying Panduit; although infringing product had multiple components, further apportionment in this case was not necessary.

Bombardier Rec. Prods. v. Arctic Cat Inc.

Court rejects Daubert challenge to lost profits and reasonable royalty analyses; court downplays importance of Panduit noninfringing-alternatives requirement and equates Georgia-Pacific analysis with apportionment between patented and unpatented features.

Georgia-Pacific Analysis Satisfies Apportionment Requirement, Court Says

Court rejects Daubert challenge to lost profits and reasonable royalty analyses; court downplays importance of Panduit noninfringing-alternatives requirement and equates Georgia-Pacific analysis with apportionment between patented and unpatented features.

No Automatic Bar to Royalties Accruing After Life of Patent

Court finds expert’s use of two-supplier and market share methods as well as Panduit test generate admissible lost profits calculation; court also admits expert’s reasonable royalty analysis, saying it does not include unlawful post-expiration sales.

Court Clarifies Rule 26 Protection for ‘Reporting’ and ‘Non-reporting’ Experts

Court says background information in expert’s report is what Rule 26 has in mind in requiring statement of “the facts or data considered by the witness” in forming his opinion; court clarifies discovery rules to communication with nonreporting expert.

3M Innovative Props. Co. v. GDC, Inc.

Court finds expert’s use of two-supplier and market share methods as well as Panduit test generate admissible lost profits calculation; court also admits expert’s reasonable royalty analysis, saying it does not include unlawful post-expiration sales.

No Automatic Bar to Royalties Accruing After Life of Patent

Court finds expert’s use of two-supplier and market share methods as well as Panduit test generate admissible lost profits calculation; court also admits expert’s reasonable royalty analysis, saying it does not include unlawful post-expiration sales.

Luminara Worldwide, LLC v. Liown Elecs. Co.

Court says background information in expert’s report is what Rule 26 has in mind in requiring statement of “the facts or data considered by the witness” in forming his opinion; court clarifies discovery rules to communication with nonreporting expert.

Court Clarifies Rule 26 Protection for ‘Reporting’ and ‘Non-Reporting’ Experts

Court says background information in expert’s report is what Rule 26 has in mind in requiring statement of “the facts or data considered by the witness” in forming his opinion; court clarifies discovery rules to communication with nonreporting expert.

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.

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.

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 ...

Does Panduit Lost Profits Theory Require Apportionment?

On retrial, court finds EMVR is not necessary to present a viable lost profits theory and denies defendants’ motion to exclude plaintiffs’ damages evidence based on prior ruling that they had failed to show evidence to support an entire market value rule ...

Federal Circuit Chides Defendants for ‘Improper’ Admissibility Challenge

Federal Circuit affirms lost profits and royalty award finding defendants raised questions of admissibility of plaintiff expert testimony in the “improper context” because these are Daubert issues; also plaintiffs’ lost profits theory meets Panduit requir ...

Brocade Communications Systems, Inc. v. A10 Networks, Inc. (II)

On retrial, court finds EMVR is not necessary to present a viable lost profits theory and denies defendants’ motion to exclude plaintiffs’ damages evidence based on prior ruling that they had failed to show evidence to support an entire market value rule ...

Versata Software, Inc. v. SAP America, Inc. (II)

Federal Circuit affirms lost profits and royalty award finding defendants raised questions of admissibility of plaintiff expert testimony in the “improper context” because these are Daubert issues; also plaintiffs’ lost profits theory meets Panduit requir ...

24 results