Ocean Tomo hosted a panel discussion on Consumer Surveys in Patent Litigation last week in Houston, Texas. Our panel of experts representing the bench included District Court Judge Lee Yeakel, WD of TX and Former Magistrate Judge and current partner at Akin Gump, Chad Everingham. Dr. Kent Van Liere from Duff & Phelps represented the survey expert perspective while Shirley Webster and Justin Lewis, from Ocean Tomo, represented the damage expert perspective. The audience consisted of litigation partners from 19 leading IP firms in Texas.
The conversation between panelists and the audience was very engaging and thought provoking, addressing several questions as to relevance and admissibility of surveys in patent litigation, including:
- Does the allegedly infringing feature matter for consumer purchase decisions?
- How important is the allegedly infringing feature in comparison to other product features?
- How much is the allegedly infringing feature worth to consumers?
While the judges had limited courtroom experience with patent surveys, they certainly view this as a future trend that requires special consideration in terms of admissibility, validity and relevance. Our survey expert referenced Judge Koh’s recent rulings in the Samsung v. Apple case as a must read for attorneys facing the calculation of damages; specifically apportionment of demand between patented and non-patented product features.
Ocean Tomo is hosting another event in the Silicon Valley on Thursday, May 15thfor a discussion with bench experts from the Northern District of California and leading survey & damage experts.