Verdict in T-Cell Immunotherapy IP Case Tests 'Reasonable Royalty' Concept for Large Damage Awards
Increasingly, plaintiffs in patent infringement suits are projecting sales through the expiration of the patent, discounting for present value, and then calling the resulting figure a “lump sum” royalty. ...more
Four subjects stood out in patent litigation in Texas in April 2023: (1) applicability of the customer-suit exception to the first-to-file rule; (2) the level of ties a reasonable royalty methodology must have to the facts of...more
By Dan Staren and David Barker Last week, a Federal Circuit panel vacated a billion dollar jury verdict in favor of plaintiff-appellee California Institute of Technology (“Caltech”) and remanded for a new trial on damages...more
This post summarizes some of the significant developments related to patent litigation in federal district courts of Texas for the month of October 2021....more
In a recent decision issued in Bayer Healthcare LLC v. Baxalta Inc., the Federal Circuit held that the district court did not abuse its discretion when it allowed the jury to select from a range of proposed royalty rates...more
A patent holder that prevails in a patent infringement suit is entitled to either lost profits or a reasonable royalty. A reasonable royalty calculation often implicates the infringing product's revenues (the "royalty...more
The language of the patent damages statute, 35 U.S.C. § 284, appears straightforward – “[u]pon finding for the claimant the court shall award the claimant damages adequate to compensate for the infringement, but in no event...more
Calculating royalty rates as part of a patent dispute often becomes a hotly-disputed issue, where opposing economic theories from expert witnesses are pinned against one another. As a litigant, care must be taken when...more
A recent decision in the Eastern District of Texas should provide standard-essential patent (“SEP”) owners with more clarity and optimism when negotiating SEP licenses. Coming on the heels of Judge Koh’s decision in the FTC’s...more
Recently, in Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 v. TCL Commc’n Tech. Holdings Ltd., the Delaware District Court awarded the prevailing plaintiff in a patent infringement suit an ongoing royalty that covers not only the products...more
PanOptis Patent Management, LLC (“PanOptis”) was recently awarded enhanced damages and ongoing royalties as a result of Huawei Technology Co. Ltd. (“Huawei”) infringing five of its patents, four of which were alleged to be...more
On February 15, a Texas federal jury found that Ericsson did not breach its obligation to offer HTC licenses to its standard-essential patents (SEPs) on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. The verdict ended...more
On October 23, 2018, we previously reported that the Federal Circuit ordered Momenta to show cause as to why Momenta’s appeal of a PTAB decision upholding the patentability of BMS’s U.S. Patent No. 8,476,239, relating to...more
On May 10, 2018, Magistrate Judge Payne reconsidered his previous March 2018 order which had vacated a jury award, and granted plaintiff Ericsson’s motion for reconsideration. The May ruling makes clear that the accused...more
On March 20, 2018, the public version of Eastern District of Texas Magistrate Judge Roy Payne’s March 7, 2018 order tossing a $75 million jury verdict obtained by Ericsson against TCL Communication was released. Ericsson...more
Microsoft and Google announced that they have settled their global patent disputes, including the litigation underlying the FRAND dispute that gave rise to Judge Robart’s first-of-its-kind decision on determining a FRAND...more
NexusCard, Inc. (“NexusCard”), a California corporation with its principal place of business in Lake Forest, California, filed a patent infringement action on August 18, 2015, against grocery chain Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc....more
In a recent decision, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a jury verdict awarding Microsoft $14.5 million for Motorola's breach of its obligation to offer Microsoft reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) licenses for certain...more
The U.S. Supreme Court today in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC upheld the longstanding Brulotte rule that a patent owner cannot continue to receive royalties for sales made after its patent expires. In a 6-3 decision,...more
Addressing the issue of convoyed and related sales, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, even while affirming the district court with respect to its invalidity and infringement findings, remanded the case for a...more
Motorola’s Appeal To Ninth Circuit Of A Jury Determination That Motorola Breached Its FRAND Obligation – In a case involving the first time a federal district court judge determined a FRAND royalty rate for standard essential...more
With the advent of the America Invents Act (AIA), public perception of frivolous patent litigation, frequently surrounding cases filed by non-practicing entities (NPEs), has received increasing legislative attention. Although...more
In This Issue: - Castle Defense: Federal Circuit Reinforces Patent Damages Gate in VirnetX - Standards Patent Licensing: Always Apportionment, Sometimes Stacking - Supreme Court to Consider Good-Faith...more
On Dec. 4, 2014, the Federal Circuit issued a much-anticipated opinion in Ericsson, Inc. v. D-Link Sys., Inc., Nos. 2013-1625, -1631, -1632, -1633 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 4, 2014). The panel—consisting of Judges Kathleen O'Malley,...more
Cellport Systems, Inc. v. Peiker Acustic GMBH & Co. KG - In a case addressing whether royalties are due under a patent licensing agreement even if the products are not covered by the patents, the U.S. Court of Appeals...more