Question of Whether Court May Convert Jury’s Lump Sum Royalty to Running Royalty Via Remittitur Certified for Appeal

The court granted plaintiff's motion for an interlocutory appeal of an earlier order granting defendant's motion for remittitur or a new trial on damages. "[T]he Court agrees with the plaintiff that there is a controlling issue of law on whether the Court must uphold the jury’s choice of a lump-sum format for a reasonable royalty in determining the maximum recovery for which there is evidentiary support. . . . This Court has not found a case where the Federal Circuit squarely addressed the issue of whether a district court can correct a damages figure on a motion for remittitur by extrapolating a royalty rate and base from the jury’s lump-sum award without express expert testimony explaining how to do so. . . . This case has been hard fought, lengthy, contentious, and expensive. It seems counterproductive to retry damages only to have one of the other issues necessitate a remand."

Trustees of Boston University v. Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd., et al, 1-12-cv-11935 (MAD August 9, 2016, Order) (Saris, USDJ)