Friday, July 15, 2011

District Court Finds that Damages Expert's "Alternative Analysis" was Not Based on Sound Economic Principles

The court granted defendant's motion in limine to exclude plaintiff's damages expert's "alternative analysis" theory in his supplemental report where he found the parties would agree on a $70 million lump sum royalty. "[Plaintiff's expert] posits that around $70 million, both [parties] would realize that they would be giving up too much if they held out any longer and would therefore agree to meet in the middle of the $0 to $138.7 million range. . . . The Court agrees that this analysis is not based in sound economic principles and factual predicates as required under the law. . . . [Plaintiff's expert's] vague statement on his reliance on 'other Georgia-Pacific factors and Business Realities considerations' are not tied to any factual predicates. It is unclear to the Court what else he relies on as part of these other factors to arrive at the $70 million number, apart from consideration of the 1% royalty rate."

Lucent Technologies, Inc., et. al. v. Gateway, Inc., et. al., 3-07-cv-02000 (CASD July 13, 2011, Order) (Huff, J.)

No comments: