Using Surveys and Other Quantitative Analyses in Patent Litigation

About the Course:

As was stated in the ResQNet.com v. Lansa litigation, Determining a fair and reasonable royalty is often . . . a difficult chore, seeming often to involve more the talents of a conjurer than those of a judge. Thus, this webinar provides crucial insight for harnessing surveys and quantitative analysis in performing admissible economic damages calculations.

This methodical webinar walks the listener through three permutations of Consumer Surveys—Ranking-Based Conjoint Analysis; Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis; and, Direct Queries. The program continues with a discussion of three variations of Regression Analysis – Price Premium / Hedonic Analysis; Market Share Premium Analysis; and, Merger Analysis. A comparative review of the aforementioned methods is examined in terms of methodology, outcomes and details. Insight as to the conditions under which the various methods should be used is provided.

The webinar concludes with numerous analyses of cases in which surveys and other analytical methods were properly and improperly used. Other issues addressed during this program include:

• The use of social media to determine popularity of products and patented features.
• The merits of conducting multiple surveys in silos.
• The wisdom or folly of a defendant putting forth his own damages calculation.
• Apportioning out the impact of marketing decisions taken by the patentee when determining price erosion caused by the existence of infringers.

Among the relevant patent litigation cases discussed during this webinar are:

• ResQNet.com v. Lansa
• Convolve v. Dell
• Lucent v. Microsoft
• Stragent v. Intel
• TV Interactive Data v. Sony
• Microsoft v. Motorola
• Sentius Int’l, LLC v. Microsoft Corp.
• Droplets, Inc. v. Overstock.com, Inc.
• NetAirus Techs. v. Apple
• Rembrandt v. Facebook
• Oracle v. Google
• VirnetX v. Cisco
• Smartflash, LLC v. Apple Inc.

Course Leaders:

Christopher K. Larus, Chair, Minneapolis IP and Technology Litigation Group, Robins Kaplan LLP Mr. Mitchell has over thirty-eight years of experience, much of it in Asia and is one of the leading American lawyers specializing in investment and financing transactions around the world.

Throughout his 20 year legal career, Chris has helped his clients protect their intellectual property rights. Chris tries complex patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret, and licensing cases. He represents both plaintiffs and defendants in courts throughout the country, and in both national and international arbitration.

Chris also works with clients to protect and monetize intellectual property assets outside of disputes context. Chris has extensive experience planning and implementing licensing campaigns involving a broad range of intellectual property assets and technologies. Chris works to understand every client’s unique goals and tailor strategies designed to maximize each clients’ return on investment.

Bryan Mechell, Associate, Robbins Kaplan LLP

Bryan Mechell is a trial lawyer and registered patent attorney with experience in complex patent litigation. He focuses on new and cutting-edge technologies in order to help large companies, small businesses, and inventors assess and protect the value of their intellectual property.

Bryan has represented clients as both plaintiffs and defendants in various phases of litigation and has experience identifying and implementing strategies to clearly and persuasively present complex legal and technical issues. He has completed coursework in quantum physics, advanced mathematics, chemistry, and computer science, and is registered to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

Course Length: Approx. 1.5 hours

$295 PER USER