VLF Consulting, Inc.

IN THE NEWS 1 of 4

• Court Rejects Royalty Apportionment Based on “Similar” Patents, No. of Claims, and Citation Analysis

  In this Daubert ruling, a Texas court rejects two of the four reasonable royalty methodologies put forth by Defendant’s damages expert.

  NCR’s expert first attempted to arrive at a reasonable royalty for …LEARN MORE

• Reasonable Royalty Apportionment Excluded For Lack of Factual Foundation

  In this Delaware patent infringement suit, the district court judge excluded plaintiff’s damages expert’s reasonable royalty opinion that apportioned 50% of product value to the patents-in-suit because his apportionment, based solely on discussions with their technical expert, lacked a factual foundation.  …LEARN MORE

• Tidy Cats Trial Ends in $3M Verdict as Both Sides Seem to Win

  Tidy Cats found to infringe an Oil-Dri patent, but the jury was not too enthused about damages.

  This week a jury awarded Chicago-based Oil-Dri damages of $3 million after a 7-day patent infringement trial against Nestle Purina, makers of Tidy Cats cat litter. …LEARN MORE

• IL Court Rejects Damages Expert’s Arbitrary Royalty Conclusions

  In a patent case regarding infant play yard arches, an Illinois district court this week excluded the royalty opinion of plaintiff’s damages expert because his royalty rate “might have been picked out of a hat.”  In Kolcraft v. Chicco, plaintiff’s expert first estimated a baseline royalty of 7.7% of sales, then adjusted it upward to 8% based on the …LEARN MORE