©2013 Morrison & Foerster LLP | All Rights Reserved | mofo.com Three Difficult Patent Infringement Damages Questions June 8, 2013 Presented By Michael.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
How to Prove Reasonable Royalty Damages after Uniloc March 3, 2011.
Advertisements

Recommended Pre-Suit Case Analysis Likelihood of infringement Likelihood of validity Size of potential recovery Likelihood of injunction and its importance.
Nov. 22, 2005 Jack Ko 1 Awarding Lost Profits for “Unpatented” Products: Rite-Hite and Other Cases By Jack Ko.
Recent Cases on Patentable Subject Matter and Patent Exhaustion Mojdeh Bahar, J.D., M.A. Chief, Cancer Branch Office of Technology Transfer National Institutes.
© 2007 Morrison & Foerster LLP All Rights Reserved Attorney Advertising The Global Law Firm for Israeli Companies Dispute Resolution in the United States.
Kendall-Jackson Winery v. E. & J. Gallo Winery N.D. Cal. (Walker, J.), 150 F.3d 1042 (9 th Cir. 1998) Paul W. Reidl Law Office of Paul W. Reidl Modesto,
1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association Non-Practicing Entities Litigation Trends and Solutions Kimberly N. Van Voorhis AIPLA-LESJ.
Renaissance of U.S. Design Patents Steven M. Gruskin Sughrue Mion, PLLC Washington, D.C. PLI Seminar, New York City January 31,
© COPYRIGHT DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Rule Of Thumb Is Extinguished Gerard Haddad Dickstein Shapiro Jonathan Putnam, PhD Charles.
Session 2: Patent Law Principles National Judicial Academy of India Judicial Training Bhopal, India ~ January 24-25, 2015 Judge James L. Robart United.
Intellectual Property Group IP Byte sm : Damages Update Steve Hankins Schiff Hardin © 2015 Schiff Hardin LLP. All rights reserved.
Crystal A. Zarpas, Esq. ___________________________________________________________ _______ MANN & ZARPAS, LLP | Ventura Blvd., Ste. 714 Sherman.
IPR Litigation System & Recent Case in Korea Hee-Young JEONG Judge of Daejeon District Court, KOREA April 22, 2015.
Presented: Japan Committee of AIPLA AIPLA Mid-Winter Conference January 22-23, 2012 Las Vegas, Nevada Hung H. Bui, Esq. Bui Garcia-Zamor Washington D.C.
John B. Pegram Fish & Richardson P.C. New York “Divided” or “Joint” Infringement.
Conference on Evolving Damages Law Hosted By the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology & The Federal Circuit Bar Association Trial Lawyer Panel Moderator.
The Legal System and Patent Damages Recent Developments Prof. Amy Landers University of the Pacific/McGeorge School of Law.
Adequate Patent Infringement Damages in Japanese Courts: Comparative Analysis Toshiko Takenaka, Ph.D. Professor of Law; Director, CASRIP University of.
Confidential - Attorney Client Privileged
Divided Infringement Patent Law News Flash!
Patent Damages – Where We Are, Where We Are Going Federal Circuit Bar Ass’n Prof. Robert Merges.
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP Andrew Thomases: Consequences of RAND Violations | 1 Consequences of RAND Violations Andrew Thomases.
Remember Adam Smith and the pillars of a free market system?
Patent Cases MM 350 Intellectual Property Law and New Media Steve Baron October 5, 2010.
Peter L. Michaelson, Esq. Michaelson and Associates Red Bank, New Jersey US © , P.L. Michaelson All rights reserved M&A -- Case.
Page 1 Patent Damages Brandon Baum James Pistorino March 26, 2015.
©2006 Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP Looking Both Ways Before You Cross the Street: How to Leverage Outside Patent Counsel 2006 APPA LEGAL SEMINAR October.
Austin ■ Boston ■ Northern California ■ Washington, D.C. Damages Analysis Innovention Toys, LLC v. MGA Entertainment, Inc. and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and.
DIVIDED/JOINT INFRINGEMENT AFTER FEDERAL CIRCUIT’S EN BANC DECISION IN AKAMAI/MCKESSON CASES AIPLA Mid-Winter Institute IP Practice in Japan Committee.
Opening Moves: Plaintiff and Defendant Perspectives on Getting the Information You Need to Intelligently Decide On What to Sue or to Defend Thomas J. Scott,
1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association The Presumption of Patent Validity in the U.S. Tom Engellenner AIPLA Presentation to.
Challenges Associated With, And Strategies For, U.S. Patent Litigation Russell E. Levine, P.C. Kirkland & Ellis LLP LES Asia.
Christine Siegwarth Meyer Vice President Philadelphia, PA October 31, 2006 Effective uses of survey methods to determine damages Law Seminars International.
1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association Patent Damages Ranga Sourirajan IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting Washington,
1 Getting to “Reasonable” Law Seminars International Standards Bodies and Patent Pools Conference Arlington, Virginia October 2007 Alan Cox Senior Vice.
Patent Cases MM 450 Issues in New Media Theory Steve Baron March 3, 2009.
Margaret Polson Polson Intellectual Property Law, PC US Design Patents Overview.
2015 ASIP Jeju Conference Presented by: Alex Timberman: Juris Doctor in business law, PhD candidate in economics of Hannam University, licensed attorney.
Patent Remedies Class Notes: April 1, 2003 Law 677 | Patent Law | Spring 2003 Professor Wagner.
LAW OF COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY FALL 2015 © 2015 MICHAEL I. SHAMOS Software Patents Michael I. Shamos, Ph.D., J.D. Institute for Software Research School of.
Jason Murata Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP Patent Infringement: Round Up of Recent Cases.
© 2007 Sidley Austin LLP, Los Angeles, CA All rights reserved. What is a Civil Case?
Patent Cases IM 350 Lamoureux & Baron Sept. 6, 2009.
1 1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association THE STATUS OF INDUCEMENT Japan Intellectual Property Association Tokyo Joseph A. Calvaruso.
Patent Infringement MM450 March 30, What is Patent Infringement? Making, using or selling an invention on which a patent is in force without the.
Intellectual Property Rights TrademarksTrademarks: protects novel marks & designs used in marketing & advertising for an indefinite period as long as in.
DMCA Notices and Patents CasesMM450 February, 2008 And now, for something new, useful and not obvious…
HOT TOPICS IN PATENT LITIGATION ABA – IP Section, April 9, 2011 Committee 601 – Trial and Appellate Rules & Procedures Moderator: David Marcus Speakers:
Class 24: Finish Remedies, then Subject Matter Patent Law Spring 2007 Professor Petherbridge.
Ongoing Royalties in Patent Litigation The Evolving Case Law on Damages for Post-Verdict Infringement: Procedural Issues Nicole D. Galli February 15, 2011.
Where value is law. © 2012 Hodgson Russ LLP PATENT PIRACY: WHEN IS OFFSHORE ACTIVITY INFRINGEMENT? Jody Galvin Melissa Subjeck July.
Damages in One (Fairly) Easy Lesson Patent Law Prof. Merges.
Damages in One (Fairly) Easy Lesson Patent Law Prof. Merges.
Thoughts About SEPs and Non-SEPs Hint: It’s Not About Mushrooms
Trademarks III Infringement of Trademarks
What’s New in Patent Damages?
Patent Damages Update Advanced Patent Litigation 2012
© 2006 Brett J. Trout Patent Reform Act of 2005 © 2006 Brett J. Trout
CURRENT STATUS OF DIVIDED INFRINGEMENT AND INDUCEMENT
MM 350 Intellectual Property Law and New Media
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning.
Damages Panel – Apportionment, Early Damages Disclosures, Enhanced Damages, and More! December 14, 2017 Karen Boyd, Turner Boyd Daralyn Durie, Durie Tangri.
Samsung vs. Apple, Inc. First US trial verdict – Aug 24, 2012
WesternGeco v. ION: Extraterritoriality and Patents
APLI: Patent Damages Presented by Ashok Ramani, Leah Waterland, & Melissa Pittaoulis December 6, 2018.
Patent Damages Pupilage Groups 3 & 4
“The View From the Corner of U.S. Competition Law and Patents”
Pitfalls and privilege in a post-halo World
Presentation by Seung Woo Ben Hur September 2019
Presentation transcript:

©2013 Morrison & Foerster LLP | All Rights Reserved | mofo.com Three Difficult Patent Infringement Damages Questions June 8, 2013 Presented By Michael A. Jacobs

2 How Does One Prove a Patent’s “Footprint”? “To be admissible, expert testimony opining on a reasonable royalty rate must carefully tie proof of damages to the claimed invention’s footprint in the market place.” Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 632 F.3d 1292 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (quoting ResQNet.com, Inc. v. Lansa, Inc., 594 F.3d 860, 869 (Fed. Cir. 2010)) “If it can be shown that the patented feature drives the demand for an entire multi-component product, a patentee may be awarded damages as a percentage of revenues or profits attributable to the entire product.” LaserDynamics, Inc. v. Quanta Computer, Inc., 694 F.3d 51, (Fed. Cir. 2012)

3 Is the footprint….like this?

4 Or Like…This?

5 When Must an Invention “Drive” Customer Demand?

6 “The Federal Circuit very recently opined that the Panduit factors ‘place no qualitative requirement on the level of demand necessary to show lost profits,’ see Versata Software, Inc. v. SAP America, Inc., [No , 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 8838, at *25 (Fed. Cir. May 1, 2013)], thus suggesting that apportionment – at least as consumer demand stands as a way of showing apportionment – is unnecessary under Panduit.” Brocade Communs. Sys. v. A10 Networks, Inc., No. C , 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69335, at *15-16 n.12 (N.D. Cal. May 15, 2013) “You must allocate the lost profits based upon the customer demand for the patented feature of the infringing [product] [method]. That is, you must determine which profits derive from the patented invention that [alleged infringer] sells, and not from other features of the infringing [product] [method].” Northern District of California Model Jury Instruction 5.2.

7 Are Some Valid and Infringed Patents In-Valuable?

8 Q: Just to follow up on the types of market evidence that you would prefer to survey evidence, can you give us an example? A: Yes, I’ve always had the sense that if I could, for example, put a company’s chief financial officer or other company witness on the stand, he or she could give me an idea of the value of every feature on their product. I mean somebody has got to be able to do that, right? That’s their business. And they’ve got to decide which features they put on their products and which they don’t to compete in the marketplace. But I don’t seem to get that CFO or company person testifying with that degree of specificity — that is, the dollar value of every feature which must be in somebody’s file. Interview with Chief Judge Rader, IP360, Oct. 18, 2012 AVM Technologies v. Intel Corp., 1:10-cv RGA (D. Del. Jan. 4, 2013) (rejecting microprocessor as royalty base even though smallest saleable unit; rejecting comparison to portfolio licenses; indicating intent to strike expert report)