Westerngeco v. Ion Geophysical (July 2, 2015)

The opinion discusses several damages issues, including extraterritorial reach of patent damages, specifically limitations of that reach. It also discusses the exclusion of a damages expert who opined that the royalty rate should be 4 times the price of the accused items. Specifically the CAFC noted that the exclusion of the expert was merited given that:

This case provides a potential cap on damages and thus a response to Stickle v. Heublein where damages may be higher than an infringer’s profit and higher than the price set on the infringing product.

Warsaw Orthopedic v Nuvasive (March 2, 2015)

This opinion may affect analysis under Georgia-Pacific factor 2 and will affect damages under lost profits (using Poly-America as a starting point). It may provide an interesting read. Here is an excerpt of the royalty discussion:

Critical for an expert is explanation of the relationship, if any, of the licensee and licensor.