The court denied plaintiff's motion in limine to exclude defendant's damages expert from testifying about his real-world negotiations theory. "Under this theory, two parties come to a negotiation with their 'best alternative to a negotiated agreement' and a reservation price. The two parties will only come to an agreement if there is an overlap between their 'zone of potential agreement'. . . . [Plaintiff] argues that this theory ignores that the hypothetical negotiation between two parties should (1) assume the patent is valid and infringed, (2) allow parties to walk away, and (3) ignores information about the 'Book of Wisdom.'. . . The Court agrees with [defendant] that there is no single correct approach at calculating reasonable royalties. . . . [Defendant's expert's] negotiation that he applies to the facts of this case is widely accepted in the scientific community and has been published in many journals. The Court concludes that [his] negotiation theory is based on reliable principles and methods."
Lucent Technologies, Inc., et. al. v. Gateway, Inc., et. al., 3-07-cv-02000 (CASD June 16, 2011, Order) (Huff, J.)
No comments:
Post a Comment