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.
‘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.
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 ...
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.
Robocast, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. (II)
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.”
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 ...
Finding ‘Smallest Salable Unit’ Does Not End Royalty Base Analysis
District court finds expert’s royalty analysis is fatally defective as to the base and rate; expert improperly presumed that using smallest salable unit featuring the patented part ended rate analysis even though that feature was not closely tied to defen ...
Robocast, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. (I)
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 ...
Glaring Unfamiliarity With Patent Law Disqualifies Expert
District court disqualifies proffered expert under all the Daubert factors, finding he lacked any understanding of patent cases and the dominant legal principles; he applied the discredited 25% rule of thumb and the entire market value rule, failed to pro ...
Invocation of EMVR Subject to Higher Degree of Proof
In ruling on defendants’ post-trial motion, district court finds plaintiff’s expert improperly invoked the entire market value rule (EMVR) in calculating lost profits because customers did not decide to buy a system containing the patented device simply t ...
Rembrandt Social Media, LP v. Facebook
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 ...
‘Murky’ Infringement Theory Undercuts Royalty Claim
District court denies both parties’ motions for new trial, finding an award for “induced infringement” would be based on the very act of infringement that underlies the award for direct infringement and would be double dipping; also since the patented tec ...