The court denied without prejudice defendants' motion to compel discovery regarding plaintiff's settlement negotiations where plaintiff already produced the settlement agreements. "Defendants have not demonstrated that the settlement agreements are inconsistent to a degree that discovery of the actual settlement negotiations is necessary to determine how the patented technology was previously valued. [Plaintiff's] former settlement agreements establish a rational and consistent royalty rate. Whether [plaintiff's damages expert's] opinion regarding the royalty rate is the proper measure of the value of the patent is question to be answered by a jury at trial."
CEATS, Inc. v. Continental Airlines, Inc., et. al., 6-10-cv-00120 (TXED January 5, 2012, Order) (Davis, J.)
No comments:
Post a Comment