17 Cited authorities

  1. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

    509 U.S. 579 (1993)   Cited 26,452 times   228 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a trial judge must ensure that all admitted expert testimony "is not only relevant, but reliable"
  2. Halo Elecs., Inc. v. Pulse Elecs., Inc.

    136 S. Ct. 1923 (2016)   Cited 497 times   59 Legal Analyses
    Holding that section 284 " ‘commits the determination’ whether enhanced damages are appropriate ‘to the discretion of the district court’ "
  3. Westerngeco LLC v. Ion Geophysical Corp.

    138 S. Ct. 2129 (2018)   Cited 103 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Rejecting the defendant's extraterritoriality argument because the case involved a "permissible domestic application" of the patent damages statute
  4. Arctic Cat Inc. v. Bombardier Recreational Prods. Inc.

    876 F.3d 1350 (Fed. Cir. 2017)   Cited 178 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an alleged infringer bears an initial burden of production to identify unmarked patented products
  5. Georgetown Rail Equip. Co. v. Holland L.P.

    867 F.3d 1229 (Fed. Cir. 2017)   Cited 85 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding that the jury's willfulness verdict was supported by "evidence of the parties' prior business dealings from which the jury could have inferred that [the infringer] believed that it needed to . . . license [the patents] to avoid infringement"
  6. Westerngeco L.L.C. v. ION Geophysical Corp.

    837 F.3d 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2016)   Cited 76 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Noting that “where the volume of non-infringing sales is independent of the extent of United States infringement, those sales should not be used as a measure of damages flowing from the domestic infringement”
  7. WCM Indus., Inc. v. IPS Corp.

    2016-2211 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 5, 2018)   Cited 47 times
    Holding that in reviewing "under the new Halo standard" a district court's award of enhanced damages, "we must determine whether the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to [the plaintiff], was sufficient to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that [the defendant] acted despite a risk of infringement that was either known or so obvious that it should have been known to [the defendant]"
  8. Westerngeco L.L.C. v. Ion Geophysical Corp.

    913 F.3d 1067 (Fed. Cir. 2019)   Cited 14 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Invalidating all but one asserted claim and determining that "the award can be sustained if there was undisputed evidence that the technology covered by [the remaining claim] was necessary to perform the [infringing method]"
  9. Oxford Gene Technology Ltd. v. Mergen Ltd.

    345 F. Supp. 2d 431 (D. Del. 2004)   Cited 29 times
    Holding expert report satisfied Rule 702 and heavy reliance on two of fifteen Georgia-Pacific factors went to weight and not admissibility of opinion
  10. Sonos, Inc. v. D&M Holdings Inc.

    297 F. Supp. 3d 501 (D. Del. 2017)   Cited 10 times
    Holding experts may opine about ultimate conclusion of enablement
  11. Rule 702 - Testimony by Expert Witnesses

    Fed. R. Evid. 702   Cited 26,844 times   260 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the Daubert standard
  12. Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 5   Cited 22,254 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system
  13. Section 284 - Damages

    35 U.S.C. § 284   Cited 2,082 times   194 Legal Analyses
    Granting "interest and costs as fixed by the court"