直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Article

Damages: “Built-In” Apportionment Using Comparable License Agreements

September 2022

The Licensing Journal

By Daniel C. Cooley; Kathleen Hanley*

Calculating patent damages is “not an exact science.” This is especially true when addressing principles of apportionment. The principle of apportionment seeks to ensure that the patent holder does not obtain an unfair benefit by receiving value for features of the infringing product that are not covered by the asserted patent. It does so by requiring that the patentee “apportion” the damages between the patented feature and all other non-patented features. But determining how to apportion, especially when there is evidence of comparable license agreements, requires careful analysis.

Read "Damages: "Built-In" Apportionment Using Comparable License Agreements"

Tags

damages

Downloadable Files

  • PUBLISHED - The Licensing Journal - Damages_'Built-In' Apportionment Using Comparable License Agreements - DCC KCH - September 2022

Related Practices

Diligence, Licensing, and Opinions

Licensing, Pooling, and Other Transactions

Related Offices

Reston, VA

Related Professionals

Daniel C. Cooley
Partner
Reston, VA
+1 571 203 2778
Email

*Kathleen Hanley is a law clerk at Finnegan

Reprinted with permission from The Licensing Journal
, published by Wolters Kluwer. 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.

Related Insights

Hybrid Conference

Intellectual Property Law Institute 2026 – California

October 19-20, 2026

San Francisco

Hybrid Conference

Intellectual Property Law Institute 2026 – New York

September 28-29, 2026

New York

Conference

IAM Live: SEP Summit Global 2026

September 9-10, 2026

London

Conference

Finnegan IP Summit 2026: Celebrating an Inclusive Talent Pipeline

August 11-13, 2026

Washington, DC

Conference

13th Annual Summit for Women Leaders in Life Sciences Law

July 29-30, 2026

Boston

Conference

2026 China Pharmaceutical Innovation Conference

July 22-24, 2026

Shanghai

Webinar

Successful Strategies to Win Alice Motions and Fee Awards in Patent Cases Against Non-Practicing Entities

July 22, 2026

Webinar

Webinar

Early Motions in Trade Secret Litigation – Offensive and Defensive Insights

July 15, 2026

Webinar

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit Vacates and Remands Infringement and Damages Judgment After Erroneous Verdict Form and Eligibility Analysis

July 8, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP