Case nameExergen Corporation v. Kaz USA, Inc.

Area of Law: Patent Law

Grounds: Defendant moved in limine to exclude Plaintiff’s patent damages analysis under the entire market rule on ground that it was improper to use the fact relating to laws of nature as the primary driving factor in sales of Plaintiff’s products.

Outcome: Denied


The court stated that it was not aware of the use of section 101 (35 U.S.C. § 101 which guides patentability of inventions) analysis in the context of damages. It noted the Supreme Court noted with regard to section 101, that ultimately all inventions utilize a law of nature (or abstract concept) on some level, and useful and novel applications of law of nature are patentable. And to the extent that an application of a law of nature is patentable, there is no reason why that application cannot also be the primary driving factor is sales of products embodying the claims.