Tell a Friend

 

How to Prove Damages in Patent, Trademark and Copyright Cases
   LIVE Webcast  

 


Event Details:                                                                                                                                                          

Intellectual property (IP) litigation presents a whole host of challenges for companies and attorneys especially in terms of estimating, calculating and proving patent damages.

This Live Webcast will teach attorneys, among other things, how to prove damages in patent, trademark and copyright cases, how to obtain more evidence, how to calculate and estimate IP damages and how to recognize and avoid common IP pitfalls. This is a must attend for all attorneys who need to be in the know with respect to intellectual property. The panel of thought leaders will be available to answer questions and illuminate the latest regulatory updates for participants.

Course Level: Intermediate
Prerequisite: None
Method Of Presentation: Group-Based-Internet
Developer: The Knowledge Group, LLC
Recommended CLE/CPE Hours: 1.75 - 2.0
Advance Preparation: Print and review course materials
Course Code: 124374
NASBA Field of Study: Specialized Knw and Apps - 2.0 credit hours
Recording Fee: $299 (Please click here for details)

 

Featured Speakers for How to Prove Damages in Patent, Trademark and Copyright Cases LIVE Webcast :


Agenda  (click here to view more)


SEGMENT 1:
S. Christian Platt, Partner ,
Paul Hastings LLP

  • 1. Successfully applying recent Federal Circuit decisions on patent damages:
    • a. Proper application of the entire market rule. Laserdynamics v. Quanta
    • b. Proving and calculating damages when considering a multi-component product accused of infringement. Id.
    • c. Proving and calculating damages based on indirect infringement theories in light of the Federal Circuit’s per curiam decision in Akamai Technologies v. Limelight Networks.
    • d. Meeting and exceeding the level of evidence needed to support a damages award in a patent case. Transocean Offshore Deepwater Drilling, Inc. v. Maersk Drilling USA, Inc. and Whiteserve, LLC v. Computer Packages, Inc.
  • 2. The importance of Daubert challenges: Recent case law developments shape the appropriate scope of expert testimony to be offered.
    • a. Oracle v. Google (N.D. Cal.). With a $6 billion damages claim, this case illustrates the complexity and potential consequences of various damages theories. After the court upheld a Daubert challenge to the plaintiff’s damages expert, it appointed an independent expert. However, the court ultimately excluded that independent expert as well on other grounds.
    • b. Apple v. Motorola (N.D. Ill.). Sitting by designation at the district court level, Judge Richard Posner dismissed the case with prejudice after excluding the damages experts for both parties. His decision focused on the need for objective comprehensive damages evidence and found that “the parties have failed to present enough evidence to create a triable issue [on damages].”
    • c. GenProbe v. Becton Dickinson (S.D. Cal.) – The court denied a Daubert challenge to a damages expert using the Nash bargaining solution, a mathematical proof that has been used recently in calculating reasonable royalties in patent cases. Although the court recognized that other courts (such as the Oracle court) had rejected the Nash bargaining solution, the court found that the expert’s calculations were sufficiently tied to the facts of the case.


SEGMENT 2:
Shawn Fox, Partner,
McGladrey LLP

  • • Important Considerations in Analyzing Licensee and Licensor Licensing Agreements,
  • • Key Points to Consider in Non-Practicing Entity (“NPE”) License Agreements and Rate Cards
  • • Using the Analytical Method to calculate Reasonable Royalty
  • • Analyzing incremental economic benefit of the patented technology over the non-infringing alternative(s)
    •  Licensee’s Benefits Received
    •  Licensor’s Opportunity Costs


SEGMENT 3:
Aaron R. Fahrenkrog, Attorney,
Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi LLP

  • 1. What Difference Does It Make? Articulating and Developing the Benefits of the Patented Invention to Establish Damages.
  • 2. The Art of Quantification: Making Sure Your Experts Are Qualified to Quantify the Technical and Economic Benefits of the Patented Invention.
  • 3. Identifying Non-infringing Alternatives in the Prior Art and in the Present Market, and Accounting for These in the Patent Damages Analysis.


SEGMENT 4:
David Blackburn, Vice President,
NERA Economic Consulting

  • 1. How Do Copyright and Trademark Damages Differ from Patent Damages?
    • - Understanding and calculating actual harm
    • - Unjust enrichment, double-counting, and punting the burden of proof
    • - The importance of nexus
  • 2. Comparables: The Use and Misuse of Benchmark Royalty Rates
    • - What makes a benchmark a good or bad fit?
    • - How does one effectively argue for or against these benchmark rates? What is persuasive and what fails the smell test?


SEGMENT 5:
Daniel W. McDonald, Partner,
Merchant & Gould P.C.

  • 1. Case study on how to use recent patent damages case law to exclude a patent owner’s entire damages case, resulting in an award of $0 in damages even when infringement was found.
  • 2. Tips on presenting and fighting patent damages claims, including how to apply recent damages case law to attack inflated damages claims by NPEs (sometimes called “trolls”).




Paul Hastings LLP
S. Christian Platt
Partner
speaker bio »»

McGladrey LLP
Shawn Fox
Partner
speaker bio »»

Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi LLP
Aaron R. Fahrenkrog
Attorney
speaker bio »»

NERA Economic Consulting
David Blackburn
Vice President
speaker bio »»

Merchant & Gould P.C.
Daniel W. McDonald
Partner
speaker bio »»



Who Should Attend?

- IP & Related Attorneys
- General Counsel
- Marketing Directors
- Brand Managers
- Marketing executives
- Advertising Professionals
- Marketing Professionals
- In-House Counsel
- Copyright Lawyers
- IP Attorneys & Consultants
- IP and Copyright Consultants
- Corporate Senior Management

Why Attend?

This is a must attend event for anyone knowing the best practices in proving IP damages.

- Detailed guidance explained by the most qualified key leaders & experts
- Hear directly from experienced practitioners & thought leaders
- Interact directly with panel during Q&A

Join this live webcast by clicking the “Register” button below. Advanced registration is advised as space is limited. Significant discounts apply to early registrants.

Registration Information:                                                                                                                                    


(Click here for information on group registrations and discounts)

Disclaimer:
Please note, the event date is firm although it may be subject to change. Please click here for details.
The Knowledge Group, LLC is producing this event for information purposes only. We do not intend to provide or offer business advice. The contents of this event are based upon the opinions of our speakers. The Knowledge Congress does not warrant their accuracy and completeness. The statements made by them are based on their independent opinions and does not necessarily reflect that of The Knowledge Congress' views. In no event shall The Knowledge Congress be liable to any person or business entity for any special, direct, indirect, punitive, incidental or consequential damages as a result of any information gathered from this webcast.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


How to Prove Damages in Patent, Trademark and Copyright Cases
LIVE Webcast
Speaker Firms:




Paul Hastings is a leading global law firm with offices throughout Asia, Europe, and the United States. The firm is ranked second on The American Lawyer’s A-List of the most successful law firms in America. Their lawyers provide innovative legal solutions to many of the world's top financial institutions and Fortune 500 companies. The firm offers a complete portfolio of services to support clients’ complex, often mission-critical needs – from structuring first-of-their-kind transactions to resolving complicated disputes to providing the savvy legal counsel that keeps business moving forward. Drawing on the firm’s dynamic, collaborative, and entrepreneurial culture, their lawyers work across practices, offices, and borders to provide innovative, seamless legal counsel. Please visit www.paulhastings.com for more information.




McGladrey LLP is the largest U.S. provider of assurance, tax and consulting services focused on the middle market, with more than 6,500 professionals and associates in 75 offices nationwide. McGladrey is a licensed CPA firm, and is a member of RSM International, the sixth largest global network of independent accounting, tax and consulting firms. For more information join our Facebook fan page at McGladrey News, follow us on Twitter @McGladrey, connect with us on LinkedIn, and/or on YouTube




Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. is a national litigation firm whose clients include Fortune 500 corporations, emerging markets companies, entrepreneurs, and individuals as both plaintiffs and defendants. The firm engages in high-stakes, complex litigation with significant bottom-line implications for its clients.




NERA Economic Consulting (www.nera.com) is a global firm of experts dedicated to applying economic, finance, and quantitative principles to complex business and legal challenges. For half a century, NERA’s economists have been creating strategies, studies, reports, expert testimony, and policy recommendations for government authorities and the world’s leading law firms and corporations. We bring academic rigor, objectivity, and real world industry experience to bear on issues arising from competition, regulation, public policy, strategy, finance, and litigation.




Merchant & Gould has engaged exclusively in the practice of intellectual property law, including patent, trademark, copyright, unfair competition, trade secret, advertising and computer law, and related litigation including both trials and appeals, for 110 years.

With offices in Atlanta, Denver, Knoxville, Madison, Minneapolis, New York City, Seattle and Washington DC, and more than 100 practicing attorneys, the firm is one of the largest intellectual property law firms in the United States. Typically, our attorneys are admitted to practice in the state where they reside and nearly all are admitted to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). We are consistently ranked as a top patent, trademark and copyright firm both in the U.S. and globally. We value our client relationships, and actively partner with clients to understand, build, and implement technology and intellectual property driven strategies that add bottom-line business value. The depth and breadth of our legal and technical knowledge, coupled with years of experience in helping clients create and strategically manage global intellectual property assets, uniquely positions us to be a valued member of the client team.




 

The Knowledge Group, LLC is registered with the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy (NASBA) as a sponsor of continuing professional education on the National Registry of CPE Sponsors. State boards of accountancy have final authority on the acceptance of individual courses for CPE credit. Complaints regarding registered sponsors may be addressed to the National Registry of CPE Sponsors, 150 Fourth Avenue North, Suite 700, Nashville, TN, 37219-2417. Website: www.nasba.org



 

We are an approved multi-event sponsor in the state of California. Our provider ID is: 14451. In Texas, Illinois, and Virginia, we submit programs for individual approval in advance. In all other states, once attendance is verified, participants are emailed an official certificate of attendance which they submit to their respective State Bar Associations. Our programs are created with continuing education in mind and are therefore designed to meet the requirements of all State Bar Associations. If you have any questions, please email our CLE coordinator at: info@knowledgecongress.org

Attention New York Attorneys:

This program is approved for CLE credit under New York’s Approved Jurisdiction policy. The Knowledge Group, LLC is an approved sponsor in the state of California, a New York Approved Jurisdiction. This program fulfills the non-traditional format requirement of exceeding 60 minutes in length. Please note only experienced attorneys (more than 2 years) are eligible to receive CLE credit via non-traditional format learning platforms. The Knowledge Group will verify attendance during the webcast via secret words (3 per credit hour) and by auditing attendees log in and log out records. All verification instructions will be provided during the webcast. Once attendance verification requirements have been completed, the attendee will be issued a certificate of attendance be The Knowledge Group for the course with the recommended number of credit hours. The Certificate of Attendance is normally sent via email in 24 hours or less.

To Claim Your CLE Credits:

The attorney should simply include credits earned via Knowledge Group webcasts when computing the total number of CLE credits completed, and keep the Knowledge Group Certificate of Attendance for a period of at least four (4) years in case of audit. An attorney may count towards her/his New York CLE requirement credit earned through the Approved Jurisdiction policy without notifying the CLE Board.

To learn more about New York’s Approved Jurisdiction policy. Please visit: http://www.nycourts.gov/attorneys/cle/approvedjurisdictions.shtml

Attention Pennsylvania Attorneys:

Knowledge Congress is not yet an Accredited Distance Learning Provider in PA, neither the instructors nor any PA attendees will receive credit for the course.



 
Enrolled Agents Sponsor ID Number: 7602U

We have entered into an agreement with the Office of Professional Responsibility, Internal Revenue Service, to meet the requirements of 31 Code of Federal Regulations, section 10.6(g), covering maintenance of attendance records, retention of program outlines, qualifications of instructors, and length of class hours. This agreement does not constitute an endorsement by the Office of Professional Responsibility as to the quality of the program or its contribution to the professional competence of the enrolled individual.