Expert’s Rejection of Georgia-Pacific Factors in Favor of "Market Approach" for Calculating Reasonable Royalty Does Not Warrant Exclusion of Testimony

The court denied defendants' motion to exclude the testimony of plaintiff's damages expert and rejected their argument that the expert's "market approach" methodology was unreliable. "According to Defendants, [the expert's] 'Market Approach' is not approved by the Federal Circuit. Rather, at best, the 'Market Approach' is a broad application of the first two Georgia-Pacific factors . . . [Plaintiff's expert] admits to not using the Georgia-Pacific factors in his analysis. In fact, [he] referred to the factors during his deposition as 'outmoded' (i.e., outdated, old-fashioned). . . . [T]he Federal Circuit has indicated that it does not require that witnesses use any or all of the Georgia–Pacific factors when testifying about damages in patent cases. . . . Defendants’ disagreement with [the expert's] use of the 'Market Approach' is better addressed on cross-examination and via their own damages expert."

Stoneeagle Services, Inc. v. Pay-Plus Solutions, Inc. et al, 8-13-cv-02240 (FLMD June 19, 2015, Order) (Covington, J.)