Article
A New Checklist for Patent Damages
Authors
-
- Name
- Person title
- Senior Principal
DJ Healey
Law360
DJ Healey
April 19, 2010
In September 2009, the Federal Circuit in Lucent v. Gateway, 580 F.3d 1301, 92 U.S.P.Q.2d 1555 (Fed. Cir. 2009), reinforced two big points on damages:
1) Damages must be apportioned to the contribution of the patent to the product and the technology.
2) The hypothetical negotiation must be based only on facts.
On Feb. 5, 2010, in ResQNet.com v. Lansa, Nos. 2008-1365, -1366, 2009-1030 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 5, 2010), the Federal Circuit emphasized that “the trial court must carefully tie proof of damages to the claimed invention’s footprint in the market place.” The court in ResQNet.com specifically admonished trial courts that “[a]ny evidence unrelated to the claimed invention does not support compensation for infringement but punishes beyond the reach of the statute.” (Id. at 14)
The opinions expressed are those of the authors on the date noted above and do not necessarily reflect the views of Fish & Richardson P.C., any other of its lawyers, its clients, or any of its or their respective affiliates. This post is for general information purposes only and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed.