SCOTUS Passes on Chance to Rein in CAFC's Heightened Evidentiary Standard for Damages Experts

"Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order list denying a petition for writ of certiorari filed by patent owner EcoFactor to challenge this May's en banc ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) granting a new damages trial in EcoFactor's infringement case against Google. In dismissing EcoFactor's cert petition, the Supreme Court avoided ruling on whether the Federal Circuit has created a heightened Daubert standard for expert testimony on patent infringement damages"

"In that ruling, the CAFC panel majority found that EcoFactor's expert witness on patent damages properly apportioned the value of the patented technology from portfolio-level license agreements based on Google's internal profit and survey data. Circuit Judge Sharon Prost dissented, arguing that the license agreements were too broad to reliably reflect the value of EcoFactor's asserted patent, a line of reasoning that the full Federal Circuit largely adopted in rendering this May's ruling."

The Supreme Court denied EcoFactor's petition for certiorari, leaving intact the Federal Circuit's en banc ruling that granted a new damages trial in EcoFactor's infringement case against Google. The Federal Circuit reconsidered a prior panel decision and adopted concerns that license agreements relied on by EcoFactor's damages expert were too broad to apportion value reliably. EcoFactor contends the Federal Circuit engaged in de novo reweighing of evidence and introduced unbriefed contract interpretation theories, raising due process concerns and questions about whether the Federal Circuit imposed a heightened Daubert standard for patent damages expert testimony. Multiple judges issued strong dissents.

Read at IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law