Defendant's motion to exclude expert testimony concerning damages was denied. Calculating "a reasonable royalty based upon the total sales prices of the computers and other configurable products manufactured by [defendant] by assembly processes allegedly embodying the patented method" did not implicate the entire market value rule. "[The expert's] calculation of a reasonable royalty does not consider a combination of patented and nonpatented methods or apparatuses in order to develop the royalty base—[the expert's] analysis considers solely the products produced by a patented method. . . . If [plaintiff] is able to show that the patented method is used by [defendant] to assemble its computers to the extent described in [plaintiff's] opposition brief, then a connection between the infringement and the claimed royalty base would be established. Moreover, it is noteworthy that the patentee licensed its technology using a similar methodology."
Abstrax, Inc. v. Dell, Inc. et al., 2-07-cv-00221
(TXED September 2, 2009, Order) (Everingham, M.J.)