EcoServices v. Certified Aviation is a nonprecedential case decided on October 8, 2020, on appeal from the Central District of California. Plaintiff EcoServices sued Defendant Aviation for infringement of two patents. One patent expired before trial. Following trial, the jury returned a verdict that Aviation infringed both patents, that the …
Munchkin v. Luv N’ Care was decided on June 8, 2020, on appeal from the Central District of California. Plaintiff Munchkin sued Defendant Luv N’ Care for unfair competition, trademark infringement, trade dress infringement, and patent infringement. Subsequently, Luv N’ Care filed an IPR petition at the PTAB, which was …
Ericsson v TCL Communication Technology was decided on April 14, 2020, on appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. The district court denied defendant TCL’s motion for summary judgment that the asserted claims of plaintiff Ericsson’s patent were ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. At trial, the jury found the …
Although the Federal Circuit has “never described the Georgia–Pacific factors as a talisman for royalty rate calculations, district courts regularly turn to this 15–factor list.” Ericsson v. D-Link. The factors derive from Georgia-Pacific v. U.S. Plywood. The Federal Circuit does “not require that witnesses use any or all of the Georgia–Pacific factors when testifying about damages” in …
Although the Federal Circuit has “never described the Georgia–Pacific factors as a talisman for royalty rate calculations, district courts regularly turn to this 15–factor list.” Ericsson v. D-Link. The factors derive from Georgia-Pacific v. U.S. Plywood. The Federal Circuit does “not require that witnesses use any or all of the Georgia–Pacific factors when testifying about damages” in …
Although the Federal Circuit has “never described the Georgia–Pacific factors as a talisman for royalty rate calculations, district courts regularly turn to this 15–factor list.” Ericsson v. D-Link. The factors derive from Georgia-Pacific v. U.S. Plywood. The Federal Circuit does “not require that witnesses use any or all of the Georgia–Pacific factors when testifying about damages” in …
Although the Federal Circuit has “never described the Georgia–Pacific factors as a talisman for royalty rate calculations, district courts regularly turn to this 15–factor list.” Ericsson v. D-Link. The factors derive from Georgia-Pacific v. U.S. Plywood. The Federal Circuit does “not require that witnesses use any or all of the Georgia–Pacific factors when testifying about damages” in …
Although the Federal Circuit has “never described the Georgia–Pacific factors as a talisman for royalty rate calculations, district courts regularly turn to this 15–factor list.” Ericsson v. D-Link. The factors derive from Georgia-Pacific v. U.S. Plywood. The Federal Circuit does “not require that witnesses use any or all of the Georgia–Pacific factors when testifying about damages” in …
Personal Audio v. CBS was decided on January 10, 2020, on appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. A jury found for plaintiff Personal Audio on infringement and invalidity as to three asserted claims, and awarded $1,300,000 as damages against defendant CBS. When the PTAB issued a final written decision …
Although the Federal Circuit has “never described the Georgia–Pacific factors as a talisman for royalty rate calculations, district courts regularly turn to this 15–factor list.” Ericsson v. D-Link. The factors derive from Georgia-Pacific v. U.S. Plywood. The Federal Circuit does “not require that witnesses use any or all of the Georgia–Pacific factors when testifying about damages” in …