Expand the following panels for additional search options.

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 ...

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 ...

Personalized Media Communications, LLC v. Zynga, Inc.

Court denies defendant’s Daubert motion finding plaintiff expert determined royalty base consistent with plaintiff’s infringement theory that defendant’s entire product infringed and the product was not functional without the patented technology.

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 ...

Electro-Mechanical Corp. v. Power Distribution Products, Inc.

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 ...

The war against software patents rages on

Prior Standards Licenses Reflect Asserted Patents’ ‘Real-World’ Valuation

In IEEE 802.11n standard infringement case, district court denies defendants’ Daubert motion finding plaintiff expert’s damage model based on per unit royalty on sales of accused products included two levels of apportionment to properly capture only the v ...

Dynetix Design Solutions, Inc. v. Synopsis, Inc.

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 ...

Info-Hold, Inc. v. Muzak LLC

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 ...

ITC imposes ban on some Samsung smartphones

Enzo Biochem, Inc. v. Applera Corp.

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 ...

76 - 100 of 209 results