Best Practices for Working with IP Damages Experts Based on an Unprecedented Study of Case Outcomes

In recent years, US district courts have scrutinized parties’ damages calculations in intellectual property litigation—with the admissibility of damages experts’ opinions routinely challenged. Courts regularly exclude damages experts’ opinions that fail to meet the demanding standards set forth in the US Supreme Court’s 1993 Daubert decision.

In a recent, first-of-its-kind study, damages experts Deepa Sundararaman and Cleve Tyler reviewed more than 400 orders covering nearly 1,300 decisions on specific challenges regarding IP damages expert opinions and examined reasons why experts were challenged and the outcome of those challenges.

Please join a discussion between the researchers and our partners Melissa Anyetei and Manuel Velez on best practices in working with IP damages experts in view of the study’s results. In particular, the panel will address:

• Top takeaways for practitioners and experts on assessing whether to challenge an expert’s opinion and on what grounds
• Trends in expert testimony exclusion
• Substantive reasons for admissibility challenges
• Disparities in exclusion rates between districts and judges
• The impact of the Supreme Court’s Heartland decision on exclusion rates
• Recent changes to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, which guides the admissibility of expert testimony, and their potential impact on admissibility 

For additional information, please contact Hilda Macauley at hmacauley@mayerbrown.com or +1 202 263 3047.

---

CLE is not available when viewing a recording of this program. In order to receive credit you must have attended the live webinar program.