18May/120
Ongoing royalty same as jury verdict where circumstances had not changed
On April 25, 2012, the Western District of Pennsylvania in University of Pittsburgh v. Varian Medical Systems, Inc., Case 2:08-cv-01307-AJS, addressed ongoing royalties in this hotly contested case that we have previously featured on this blog. The court concluded that the ongoing royalty rate should be the same as the jury’s rate because circumstances had not changed between the dates of the two hypothetical negotiations—the date used at trial and the post-verdict date.
17May/120
Recent Articles on Patent Damages
15May/120
EDTX Post-Trial Order on Multiple Issues: Ongoing Royalty Base and Payment of Ongoing Royalties; Supplemental Damages & Prejudgment Interest; Foreign Tax Laws; Extending Ongoing Royalties to Successors and Assigns; Stay of Supplemental Damages and Ongoing Royalties Pending Appeal
7May/120
Lost Profits Rejected Where Patentee Failed to Prove It “Would Have Made” a Competing Product Absent the Alleged Infringement
2May/120