October 4, 2013
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.
At the PTAB Blog
Discretion All the Way Down: USPTO Uses a Discretionary IPR Denial to Justify a
§ 325(d) EPR Denial
May 28, 2026
At the PTAB Blog
IPR and PGR Statistics for Final Written Decisions Issued in March and April 2026
May 26, 2026
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.