Inventio AG v. Thyssenkrupp Elevator Americas Corporation, et al., 1-08-cv-00874 (DED February 6, 2014, Order) (Andrews, J.)
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Expert’s Reliance on Umbrella License Did Not Warrant Exclusion of Opinion
The court denied plaintiff's motion to exclude defendant's expert because of his reliance on an umbrella license between plaintiff and its sister company. "The umbrella license that this motion revolves around is a license between [plaintiff] and . . . [one of plaintiff's] sister companies. The license covers all of [plaintiff's] U.S. intellectual property, 'including all patents, Know-how, Designs, Domain Names and Trademarks . . .' Because of the license, '[plaintiff's sister company] pays [a] license fee to [plaintiff] based on essentially all of [plaintiff's] sales and revenue in the U.S., not merely its sales of destination dispatch overlay.' Furthermore, the license includes the patents-in-suit. . . . [Defendant's expert] at least minimally connects the license in question to the patents-in-suit and rather than simply extract a royalty rate from the previous license, uses the license as only a single component of his entire analysis."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment