article thumbnail

Federal Circuit: District Court Properly Struck Expert Testimony that Failed to Apply Agreed-Upon Claim Construction

IP Watchdog

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) today issued a precedential opinion affirming a district court order that struck parts of an infringement expert report and also granted summary judgment of non-infringement to Valve Corporation. Treehouse Avatar, LLC owns U.S.

article thumbnail

Split CAFC: ‘Word Salad’ Expert Testimony Failed Under Doctrine of Equivalents Infringement Standard

IP Watchdog

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) today issued a precedential decision affirming a district court’s finding that NextStep, Inc. failed to prove that Comcast Cable Communications infringed its patents.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Authentication of Surveillance Video by Lay Witness Under Silent Witness Doctrine

E-Discovery LLC

Expert testimony may be necessary for the factfinder to decide the significance of such evidence. Expert testimony is often required to explain scientific or technical matters. But expert testimony is not required simply because one can explain a matter scientifically. State, 457 Md. 513, 516 (2018)(GPS).

Witnesses 130
article thumbnail

CAFC Vacates Section 112 Indefiniteness Ruling, Sending St. Jude Medical Back to Court

IP Watchdog

in which the court affirmed most of a ruling from the District of Minnesota, including sanctions against Niazi for improper use of expert testimony, as well as a finding of no induced infringement by St. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential decision in Niazi Licensing Corp. Jude Medical S.C.,

article thumbnail

English FRAND Developments to Watch Out for in 2022

IP Watchdog

For a long time, the courts in England have been a forum of choice for the resolution of disputes between international parties, with the promise of an experienced judiciary and a cost-efficient approach to discovery and expert testimony.

article thumbnail

Relative Proportionality Argument Rejected

E-Discovery LLC

In the District of Maryland: “Unlike some other courts … this Court does not impose on the requesting party the burden of establishing the substantial similarity of the requested incidents and lawsuits subject at the discovery stage of the litigation. That is a very rigorous process, often necessitating expert testimony.

Discovery 130
article thumbnail

Non-Testifying Consultant Subject to Discovery Where Testifying Expert Relied on Consultant’s Work

E-Discovery LLC

26(a)(2) governs discovery of expert testimony. For a testifying expert, one disclosable matter is the basis, facts, and data considered by the expert in forming an opinion. Tesla moved to compel the whole ball of wax identity, a deposition, all documents and communications, invoices, etc. Plaintiffs offered half a loaf.

Discovery 130