Calculating Patent Damages: Trends in Reasonable Royalty Rates and Apportionment - Webinar

  • ID: 4482810
  • Webinar
  • BDA/Business Development Academy
1 of 3

This course immerses the listener in breaking judicial decisions that govern the acceptable methodologies for formulating reasonable royalty rates as well as apportioning the royalty base. This webinar is essential for patent damages experts, patent litigators and patentees likely to assert their patents.

The following are among the recent decisions rendered relative to patent damages awards that were discussed during this webinar:

  • Apple Inc. v. Motorola, Inc.
  • Ericsson, Inc. v. D-Link Systems, Inc.
  • Exmark Mfg. Co. v. Briggs & Stratton Power Prods. Group, LLC
  • AstraZeneca AB v. Apotex Corp
  • CSIRO v. Cisco Systems, Inc.
  • LaserDynamics, Inc. v. Quanta Computer, Inc.
  • Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat Systems, Inc.
  • Virnetx, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc.
  • Univ. of Pittsburgh v. Varian Med. Systems
  • Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.

The following are among the issues discussed:

  • Can the reasonable royalty rate ever be 0%?
  • The appropriateness of using the smallest salable unit versus the entire market value rule when deriving the royalty base.
  • Time allowed for patent damages experts to present their work during trial.
  • Do patents that have more claims deserve higher damages awards since it may be more difficult for the infringer to design around those claims?
  • Number and selection of Georgia Pacific factors to use in preparing damages calculations.
  • Difficulties in presenting comparable royalty rates derived from comparable licensing agreements
  • The merits of plaintiffs pursuing utmost damages awards versus presenting themselves as only seeking to be made whole.
Note: Product cover images may vary from those shown
2 of 3


3 of 3

Course Leader: Cass W. Christenson, Partner, Dentons

Cass Christenson has more than nineteen years of experience in complex, high-stakes litigation, including numerous trials and appeals. Mr. Christenson previously led legacy McKenna Long’s Trade Secrets and IP Litigation practice.

Mr. Christenson’s practice focuses on successfully asserting and defending claims involving trade secrets, patents, trademarks, and other intellectual property. He has tried, litigated, arbitrated, and settled cases throughout the country, including for clients operating in aerospace and defense, consumer products, VoIP and telecommunications, internet technologies, banking and financial services, franchising, real estate, medical devices, and other industries. In addition to serving as lead counsel, Mr. Christenson is adept at entering cases mid-stream to develop successful strategies and build cases for trial.

Mr. Christenson handles cases involving the misappropriation of trade secrets or other proprietary information. He is experienced in securing agreements and orders, with and without litigation, to protect trade secrets and related information. In addition, Mr. Christenson has represented both employers and former employees in trade secrets cases and contract-based disputes.

Note: Product cover images may vary from those shown
4 of 3
Note: Product cover images may vary from those shown