Plastic Omnium Advanced Innovation and Research v. Donghee America, Inc. et al, 1-16-cv-00187 (DED May 22, 2018, Order) (Stark, USDJ)
Thursday, May 24, 2018
Expert’s Reliance on Unaccepted License Proposal Does Not Render Opinion Unreliable
The court denied defendant's motion to exclude the testimony of plaintiff's damages expert regarding a reasonable royalty rate because his reliance on an unaccepted proposal was sufficiently reliable. "[The expert] discussed several additional distinguishing characteristics between the contemplated cross-license and the hypothetical license, including that the cross-license was never executed, the negotiation was for a worldwide license, design-around costs, and the possible collaboration between the parties. . . . [Defendant] argues that [his] opinions regarding this contemplated royalty offer should be excluded, because offers -- particularly if never conveyed -- have little value. . . . [A]t the time of this offer, [plaintiff's predecessor] and [a third party] were discussing a cooperation agreement, a situation quite distinct from anticipation of litigation. [Defendant's] criticisms can be adequately addressed through cross-examination and the presentation of competing evidence."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment