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.”
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 ...
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 ...
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.”
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 ...
Trademark Damages Not Contingent on Established Royalty
District court dismisses plaintiffs’ overarching claim that a reasonable royalty was not an allowable damage theory in a trademark case, as well as its narrower claim that a royalty was available only to the plaintiff that could point to an established ro ...
Prior Deal’s Royalty Formula Captures Trade Secret’s Value
In trade secret case, appellate court affirms award for actual damages stemming from defendant gas & oil company’s misappropriation of plaintiff scientists’ study; expert reservoir engineer properly relied on the compensation formula of plaintiffs’ prior ...
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 ...
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 ...
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 ...
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 ...
ITT Corp. v. Xylem Group, LLC
District court dismisses plaintiffs’ overarching claim that a reasonable royalty was not an allowable damage theory in a trademark case, as well as its narrower claim that a royalty was available only to the plaintiff that could point to an established ro ...
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 ...
Federal Circuit Affirms $95 Million Patent Award Based on Price Erosion Theory
Federal Circuit finds jury’s lost profits and reasonable royalty award based on plaintiffs’ price erosion theory is not excessive; sufficient evidence supported expert’s “but for” damages model calculating prices two to three times as much as the prices t ...
Southwestern Energy Production Co. v. Berry-Helfand
In trade secret case, appellate court affirms award for actual damages stemming from defendant gas & oil company’s misappropriation of plaintiff scientists’ study; expert reservoir engineer properly relied on the compensation formula of plaintiffs’ prior ...