The court granted in part plaintiff's motion to preclude improper damages testimony. "[Defendant's expert's] proffered testimony regarding possible 'design arounds' as alternatives to the patented technology is wholly speculative and, consequently, not helpful to the trier of fact. There is no indication that any of the technical alternatives proposed by [him] would work. [He] admitted as much at his deposition. ('I have no idea whether or not they would be commercially viable.')"
SRI International v. Internet Security, et. al., 1-04-cv-01199 (DED October 31, 2011, Order) (Robinson, J.)
No comments:
Post a Comment