evidentiary appreciation specific to patent litigation n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Evidentiary Appreciation Specific to Patent Litigation PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Evidentiary Appreciation Specific to Patent Litigation

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 26

Evidentiary Appreciation Specific to Patent Litigation

104 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Evidentiary Appreciation Specific to Patent Litigation

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Evidentiary Appreciation Specific to Patent Litigation • Use of circumstantial evidence • (A) Uncorroborated Oral Testimony to Prove Aspects of Inventions or Prior Art • Uncorroborated oral testimony disfavored • Corroboration may not be required in all cases

  2. 1. Methods of Corroboration • Using documentary evidence to corroborate invention or prior use • Orders for unique tools and materials used to make invention • Oral testimony of other witnesses • Demonstration of prior-art device

  3. Documents related to proposal or offers for sale • Assessment of corroborating evidence

  4. (B) Authentication of Patent-Related Evidence • 1. General Aspects of Authenticating Evidence • General requirement for authentication under F.R.E. • Admissibility of duplicates

  5. Summary exhibits and underlying data--F.R.E. • Handwriting • 2. Evidence of Translations or Interpretations of Foreign Language • Translations of documents written in foreign language

  6. Interpreters of oral testimony given in a foreign language • 3. Authentication of Papers Maintained in the Patent Office • Authentication of patents, file histories, and other PTO papers

  7. Authentication of foreign patents maintained in PTO • General aspects of taking judicial notice of adjudicative facts • Judicial notice of PTO papers • Judicial notice of prior art

  8. Examples of judicial notice for miscellaneous matters • (C) Admissibility of Infringer's Own Patent • Must be issued over patent-in-suit or be prior art • Relevance to literal infringement analysis

  9. Relevance to doctrine of equivalents analysis • Relevance to disprove willful infringement • Prejudicial effect for a tendency to confuse jury • Entitlement to new trial for improper admission

  10. Admissibility of Expert Testimony • (A) General Aspects on Admissibility of Expert Testimony • Courts' recognized shortcomings in issues of scientific fact • Lay witness opinion testimony • Daubert factors

  11. Expert testimony should not be excluded based on skepticism of the ultimate opinion • Proponent must prove admissibility by preponderance of the evidence • Admissibility of facts forming basis of opinion

  12. Expert's may base opinion on conflicting version of the facts • Expert's opinion must have a supportable factual basis • Expert does not always have to observe first hand • Expert testimony not always needed

  13. Computer models • Ex parte testing • Ex Parte testing--Cases ruling Ex Parte test admissible • Ex Parte testing--Cases refusing to admit Ex Parte test or giving it no weight • Experts may opine on the ultimate issue

  14. Experts should not testify to legal opinions • Expert need not testify to underlying facts • (B) "Patent-Law" Experts • General confines on using patent-law experts • Admissibility of patent-law expert's opinion on claim construction

  15. Patent-law expert generally not permitted to testify on validity • 2. Admissibility of Patent-Law Expert's Opinions on Validity Challenges • Patent-law expert may testify as to PTO procedure

  16. Patent-law expert may testify as to PTO procedure--Prohibited from testifying as to general problems in examination process • 3. Admissibility of Patent-Law Expert's Opinions on Infringement andWillfulness • Case examples on whether patent-law expert could testify to issues relating to infringement

  17. 4. Admissibility of Patent-Law Expert's Opinions on Unenforceability • Inequitable conduct and other unenforceability defenses • Cases permitting patent-law expert's testimony on inequitable conduct

  18. Cases refusing to permit patent-law expert's testimony on inequitable • C. Technical and Damage Experts in Patent Cases • Technical experts can be of extraordinary skill in the art

  19. (1) Admissibility of Technical Expert's Opinions on Claim Construction • General aspects of admissibility of technical expert testimony on claim construction • General aspects of admissibility of technical expert testimony on claim construction--Cases excluding technical expert testimony on claim construction

  20. General aspects of admissibility of technical expert testimony on claim construction--Cases permitting technical expert testimony on claim construction • (2) Admissibility of Technical Expert's Opinions on Infringement • General aspects of admissibility of technical expert testimony on infringement

  21. General aspects of admissibility of technical expert testimony on infringement--Case examples permitting technical expert testimony on the issue of infringement • General aspects of admissibility of technical expert testimony on infringement--Case examples excluding technical expert testimony on the issue of infringement

  22. General aspects of admissibility of technical expert testimony on infringement--Cases examples addressing willful infringement • (3) Admissibility of Technical Expert's Opinions on Validity • General aspects of admissibility of technical expert testimony on patent validity

  23. Anticipation • Obviousness • (4) Admissibility of Technical Expert's Opinions on Inequitable Conduct • Inequitable conduct

  24. (5) Admissibility of Technical Expert's Opinions on Damages • General aspects of admissibility of technical expert testimony on patent damages • General aspects of admissibility of technical expert testimony on patent damages--Cases admitting damage expert's opinions

  25. General aspects of admissibility of technical expert testimony on patent damages--Cases excluding damage expert's opinion

  26. Thank You • Deepak Sharma • LL.M. (IPR), National Law University, Jodhopur. • deepak@nlujodhpur.ac.in • www.deepindya.co.nr • +91-9828345395