Expert Opinions on the Value of 4G Connectivity Excluded as Unreliable​

The court granted plaintiff's motion to exclude the testimony of two defense experts regarding the value of 4G cellular connectivity in certain devices as unreliable. 'First, [the experts] have not taken into account why a consumer might prefer one . . . device or another, and have not excluded factors other than connectivity which might explain preferences. While [one expert] characterizes these differences as 'minor,' he concedes that he did not have the data to control for these differences. Among other things, he did not control for differences in weight, materials, battery life, the presence of GPS, or the inclusion of finger print sensors. The adjustment which he does make for screen size is insufficient. Second, the value of 4G connectivity, which they put at $251 per headset does not translate to the incremental value of which [defendant's] patents add to the 4G standard. Given that this is twice the selling price of the average [plaintiff] hand set and approximately the entire selling price of others in the market . . . the opinion is implausible, and inherently unreliable. . . . Third, the [expert’s] analysis does not answer the question of the incremental value of [defendant’s] patent portfolio to the 4G standard. . . . [The experts] have valued connectivity, in essence the standard, rather than the contribution.”

TCL Communication Technology Holdings, Ltd v. Telefonaktienbolaget LM Ericsson et al, 8-14-cv-00341 (CACD February 2, 2017, Order) (Selna, USDJ)