AVM Technologies LLC v. Intel Corporation, 1-15-cv-00033 (DED May 1, 2017, Order) (Andrews, USDJ)
Wednesday, May 3, 2017
Expert Testimony Concerning Litigation Funding Agreement Excluded as Irrelevant to Hypothetical Negotiation
The court granted plaintiff's motion to exclude the testimony of defendant's damages expert regarding litigation funding agreements as irrelevant to the hypothetical negotiation analysis. "These agreements are not patent licensing agreements and are not otherwise relevant to the hypothetical negotiation between the parties. The best that can be said about litigation funding agreements is that they are informed gambling on the outcome of litigation. They are so far removed from the hypothetical negotiation that they have no relevance. I further note that if they were determined to have some marginal relevance, that I would exclude them under Rule 403 as their probative value is more than substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to [plaintiff] and of confusing the issues, as their introduction would just invite a sideshow on the economics of patent litigation."