A second court has now decided what would be a reasonable and non-discriminatory, or RAND, royalty for standard-essential patents. The September 27, 2013 decision by Judge Holderman, in the In re Innovatio litigation in N.D. Ill., which was made public on October 3 with redactions, involves patents covering 802.11 wireless LAN technology. Last April, in the Microsoft v. Motorola case in W.D. Wa., Judge Robart issued the first decision determining a RAND royalty for standard-essential patents. Judge Holderman used a methodology similar to that set forth by Judge Robart, which was a modified traditional Georgia Pacific analysis to determine the outcome of a hypothetical negotiation. A copy of Judge Holderman’s decision is available here.
Copyright © Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. This article is for informational purposes, is not intended to constitute legal advice, and may be considered advertising under applicable state laws. This article is only the opinion of the authors and is not attributable to Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, or the firm's clients.
June 10-12, 2024
San Francisco
Lecture
Patent Protection for Software-Related Inventions in Europe and the USA Training Course
June 5, 2024
Hybrid
Workshop
Life Sciences Workshop: Updates and Key Trends in Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology IP Law
May 2, 2024
Cambridge
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.
We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.
Finnegan is thrilled to announce the launch of our new blog, Ad Law Buzz, devoted solely to breaking news, developments, trends, and analysis in advertising law.