Just as the Federal Circuit has been increasingly strict on requiring prior licensing arrangements to be comparable (Lucent, Uniloc, IP Innovation v. Red Hat), this district court precludes plaintiff’s expert (Lyons) from testifying about “his experience on the medical field as a whole.”
The court states: “The court understands Plaintiffs’ argument about relevance under Georgia-Pacific factor 12, but both factor 12 and Uniloc discuss royalty rates for use of the invention and similar inventions. Mr. Lyons’s testimony involved the medical field in general, and devices not comparable to the trocars at issue in this case.”
Tyco Healthcare Group LP, et. al. v. Applied Medical Resources Corp., 9-09-cv-00176 (E.D. TX Sepr 23, 2011, Order) (Giblin)