Case Cite

SSL Services, LLC v. Citrix systems, Inc., No. 2:08-cv-158-JRG, 2013 WL 1680075 (E.D. Tex. April 17, 2013).

IPDQ Commentary

Damages experts are always “on the record.” While it may have been a close call for the court, the testimony of Defendant’s damages expert that a proffered license was “as close as – to comparable as we’re going to get,” certainly didn’t help matters.

Case Summary

Finding the patent not invalid and infringed, the jury awarded lump sum royalty damages of $10Million. Id. at *1.

Citrix challenged the award royalties, claiming the underlying licenses were not patent licenses and were therefore non-comparable and improperly admitted in evidence. Id. at *4. The court held the licenses were sufficiently comparable to be probative of the hypothetical negotiation.

While it was true that the licenses were not patent licenses, they were sufficiently comparable because they were signed just prior to the date of the hypothetical negotiation and incorporated the patent-in-suit as relevant to the technology underlying the license. Moreover, Citrix’s own damages expert admitted the license was “as close as – to comparable as we’re going to get.” Id. at *5.

The court also rejected Citrix’s argument that no reasonable jury could decide the patent was worth more than the total value of the plaintiff company. Id. at *5-*6.