In a case regarding mobile phone picture uploading, the Federal Circuit affirmed a $15 million jury verdict against Samsung despite its kitchen-sink appeals on claim construction, verdicts, and damages. Regarding damages, the appeals court concluded that Summit 6’s damages expert’s methodology was acceptable despite …LEARN MORE
A Nevada judge rejected a Daubert motion against a damages expert who based his royalty partly on a 50% profit split. Defendants called this a “rule of thumb” similar to the 25% Rule that the Federal Circuit rejected in Uniloc but the judge disagreed. …LEARN MORE
Following the jury’s $70 million lump-sum royalty damages verdict from July, the district court judge slashes Lucent’s award to $26 million, finding several shortcomings in Lucent’s damages position that the jury had accepted. This case deals with Lucent’s Day patent, called the “date picker” patent …LEARN MORE
In another case where plaintiff’s expert asserts that the reasonable royalty rate should be 50% of defendant’s profits, the defendants asked the court to exclude the opinion. In his report, Kristofer K. Swanson concludes that defendant would have been willing to pay up to 50% of its incremental profits as a royalty. …LEARN MORE
On the heels of a California district court rejecting a 50% profit split to determine a reasonable royalty, this Delaware district court accepts the methodology. …LEARN MORE