Court rules on appropriate testimony regarding reasonable royalty in patent cases, highlighting expert limitations.
In EcoFactor, Inc v Google LLC, 137 F4th 1333 (Fed Cir 2025) (en banc), the full court of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (‘Federal Circuit’) addressed the court’s role as a gatekeeper with respect to damage experts. In particular, Chief Judge Moore, writing for the court, concluded that it was improper for the trial court to allow a damages expert to testify that lump-sum settlement payments were evidence of what a reasonable royalty would be without corroboration that such payments were royalties.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Macedo et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: