Calculation of Damages

News & Analysis as of

District Court Excludes Damage Expert for Failure to Apportion But Gives Expert One More Opportunity to Supplement Report

In this patent infringement action, Plaid sought to exclude the entirety of the plaintiff's damage expert's, Robinson's, reasonable royalty analysis as based on an apportionment "plucked out of thin air." Yodlee opposed the...more

The Apple May Not Fall Far from the Fashion Industry

In 2011, Apple sued Samsung alleging among other things that various portions of Samsung smartphone products infringed claims of certain design patents owned by Apple (Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.). In 2012,...more

The Northern District of California Seeks to Bring More Clarity to Damages with its Latest Revised Patent Local Rules

On January 17, the Northern District of California approved the latest amendments to its Patent Local Rules, which became effective immediately. Traditionally seen as a thought leader on organizing and structuring patent...more

"2016-17 Supreme Court Update"

In a season of political surprises, the eight-member U.S. Supreme Court has stirred no controversy with its decisions so far this term. The handful of opinions the Court released in the fall were unanimous and, for the most...more

Lessons From The Largest Patent Damages Award In History

By now, most everyone in the patent community has heard about the $2.54 Billion dollar jury verdict in a battle over Hepatitis C medication that resulted from a jury trial in December 2016. In Delaware federal district...more

This Year’s Top Ten IP Cases

#10 Design Patent Damages § 289 - Samsung Elecs. Co., v. Apple Inc., 580 U.S. _ (Dec. 6, 2016) - In the case of a multicomponent product, the relevant article of manufacture for arriving at a damages award under...more

Case Halted: California Court Denies Class Certification in Ford Defective Steering Case

On December 22, 2016, a federal District Court Judge in the Northern District of California denied certification of three proposed classes of statewide consumers who purchased or leased certain Ford Fusion or Ford Focus...more

Dedmon: The Destiny of “Reasonable” Medical Expenses in Tennessee

Currently pending before the Tennessee Supreme Court is a case that could change the face of personal-injury litigation in the state. Accepted for review on October 24, 2016, Dedmon v. Steelman asks whether the amount billed...more

RxIP Update - 2016 Year in Review

The following are highlights of developments in Canadian life sciences intellectual property and regulatory law in 2016, updating our 2016 mid-year highlights. 1. Substantive patent law developments - Utility and...more

False Claims Act: 2016 Year in Review

We are pleased to present Bradley’s annual review of significant False Claims Act (FCA) cases, developments, and trends. From a relatively short article several years ago, the Review has grown to a significant publication...more

2016 eDiscovery Case Law Year in Review, Part 2

As we noted yesterday, eDiscovery Daily published 74 posts related to eDiscovery case decisions and activities over the past year, covering 62 unique cases! Yesterday, we looked back at cases related to admissibility and...more

Plus Feature: Ohio Supreme Court Holds That Crimes Are Torts

Crimes are crimes. And torts are torts. And now, in Ohio, crimes are also torts. Let me explain. In Ohio, as elsewhere, crimes are subject to criminal prosecution and rules of criminal procedure. ...more

IP Law December Developments: What to Expect in the Future

December has been a hot month for IP law, with important developments in several cases that may significantly impact your intellectual property prosecution and enforcement strategies. Here is a brief summary of each of these...more

U.S. Supreme Court Substantially Devalues Design Patent Damages on Multicomponent Products: What Design Patent Holders Need to...

The U.S. Supreme Court in a unanimous 8-0 opinion reversed and remanded to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit an award to Apple, Inc. of $399 million of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.'s total profits on...more

District Court Orders Plaintiff to Supplement Damage Information Provided in Federal Rule 26 Initial Disclosures Where Plaintiff...

In this discovery dispute in a patent infringement action, Frontgate contended that Balsam Brands, Inc. ("Balsam") failed to adequately respond to an interrogatory seeking information about Balsam's damages. As explained by...more

Supreme Court Update: Salman V. United States (15-628), Shaw V. United States (15-5991), Samsung Electronics V. Apple (15-777),...

Greetings, Court Fans! The Eight continue to churn out unanimous decisions to start the Term. This Update will cover four of them—Salmon v. United States (No. 15-628), clarifying the "personal benefit" element of...more

Samsung Secures 8-0 Win in the Supreme Court Reversing Apple's $400 Million Damage Award

The Supreme Court of the United States handed Samsung a victory yesterday by reversing a $400 million judgment previously won by Apple for infringement of several of Apple's design patents. In a unanimous 8-0 decision, the...more

Supreme Court Takes Small Bite of Apple, Leaves Bigger Questions Aside on Design Patent Damages

A unanimous Supreme Court held in Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc. that Section 289 of the Patent Act does not demand that the entire, infringing end-user product be the basis for determining damages for design patent...more

A Smaller Bite for Apple? Supreme Court Limits Damages for Design Patent Infringement

In a case reversing a $399 million damages award to Apple, the U.S. Supreme Court has held unanimously that an “article of manufacture” under the design patent damages statute can be anything from an entire product to a...more

Supreme Court Gives Samsung an Early Christmas Present – For Now: eDiscovery Case Law

We almost made it the entire year without an update on the ubiquitous Apple v. Samsung case. Thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court, this long lasting case isn’t done yet....more

Supreme Court Vacates $399M Design Patent Damage Award, Finding an Article of Manufacture for Damage Purposes is Not Necessarily...

In Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Apple Inc., 580 U.S. ____ (2016), the Supreme Court reversed the award of $399,000,000 for infringement of Apple’s design patents covering the iPhone (U.S. Patent Nos. D618677, D593087, and...more

U.S. Supreme Court Alters Standard for Design Patent Damages and Takes Apple's $400 Million Victory Over Samsung Away (At Least...

On December 6, 2016, the United States Supreme Court handed down an important unanimous decision regarding damages in design patent cases, throwing out a $400 million damages award that Apple had won from Samsung over...more

Apple v. Samsung – A Smartphone is More than Just a Pretty Face

Since their initial release, smartphones have been a hot commodity with intense competition. One particularly contentious issue has been their appearance. During early development, Apple, Inc. (“Apple”) obtained several...more

Litigation Alert: A Unanimous Supreme Court Reverses Federal Circuit Ruling on Damages in Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc.

On December 6, 2016, in a unanimous opinion written by Justice Sotomayor, the Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit’s affirmance of the damages award in Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc. The question before the...more

U.S. Supreme Court Overturns Apple's $400M Award Against Samsung

A Unanimous U.S. Supreme Court Pulls Back the Reach of Damages Awards for Design Patents Summary The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, December 6, 2016, unanimously held that damages awards for design patent infringement need...more

136 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 6
Popular Topics

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×