Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat Systems, Inc. (II)
Federal Circuit strikes down portion of damages, finding expert’s royalty base was unsupported because she merely apportioned to the “smallest identifiable technical component,” which itself was a multicomponent software engine that performed both noninfringing and infringing functions.
Court’s Damages Model for SEP Infringement Fails Apportionment Rules
Federal Circuit invalidates infringement award where trial court’s damages model failed to filter out value to the patent in suit accruing from its being essential to wireless standard and failed to adjust its Georgia-Pacific analysis for standardization.
Commonwealth Sci. & Indus. Research Organisation v. Cisco Sys.
Federal Circuit invalidates infringement award where trial court’s damages model failed to filter out value to the patent in suit accruing from its being essential to wireless standard and failed to adjust its Georgia-Pacific analysis for standardization.
Complex Facts Test Patent Experts’ Apportionment Skills
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.
Uncritical Use of Royalty Rate Data Spoils Damages Opinion
Court excludes most of damages testimony under Daubert because expert based reasonable royalty calculation on data from IP databases and publications without subjecting information to rigorous analysis and establishing its relevance to case at hand.
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.
Chico’s Fas, Inc. v. Clair
Court excludes most of damages testimony under Daubert because expert based reasonable royalty calculation on data from IP databases and publications without subjecting information to rigorous analysis and establishing its relevance to case at hand.
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.
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.
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 ...
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 ...