Reliably Determining Reasonable Royalty Rates from Lump Sum Licenses - In Ecofactor, Inc. V. Google LLC, Appeal No. 23-1101, The Federal Circuit held that license agreements containing a lump sum payment “based on” a royalty...more
MLC INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, LLC v. MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. Before Newman, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Summary: When relying upon lump sum...more
A recent order from the District of Delaware in Evolved Wireless, LLC v. Apple Inc., No. 15-00542 (“Evolved Wireless”) provides interesting guidance regarding the use of future sales in calculating lump-sum damages. This...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Enplas Display Device Corp. v. Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd., Appeal No. 2106-2599 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 19, 2018) In an appeal from a jury verdict and JMOLs in a patent infringement case, the...more
In February 6, 2017, the Federal Court of Appeal affirmed a decision (Docket A-43-16) of the Federal Court concerning a costs award from the liability phase of a patent infringement action between the Dow Chemical Company...more
Chief Judge Patti B. Saris of the District of Massachusetts recently issued an order paving the way for the Trustees of Boston University to seek an interlocutory appeal to clarify the Maximum Recovery Rule for remittitur....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that a most-favored licensee clause allowed a licensee that paid a lump sum of $70 million to be entitled to a refund when a subsequent licensee paid a lump sum of only...more