Case Cite

TV Interactive Data Corp. v. Sony Corp., No. 3:10-cv-00475-JCS, 2013 WL 942473 (N.D. Cal. March 11, 2013).

IPDQ Commentary

In TV Interactive Data Corp, the court allows plaintiff to proceed to trial using a conjoint analysis to apportion the value of the patented feature as a part of the overall value the accused device. This is a significant development in light of recent case law that has placed a great deal of emphasis on the EMVR and the need for patent holders to apportion patent value if they wish to succeed on damages claims.

Case Summary

The parties each filed Daubert motions seeking to exclude the other’s damages experts. Id. at *1. The opinion deals with a number of damages-related issues, the most intriguing of which relates to plaintiff’s conjoint survey in support of its damages.

Defendant moved under Daubert to exclude the testimony of plaintiff’s expert on conjoint surveys and analysis. Id. at *11. Plaintiff’s expert was a tenured and emeritus professor at the Stanford Graduate School of business and had published more than 100 peer-reviewed articles, including 23 on conjoint analysis. Id. The expert described conjoint analysis as a type of survey which conceptualizes products as bundles of attributes, treating price as one attribute. Id. Conjoint analysis uses customer surveys to determine values for each attribute. By choosing among various bundles of attributes, survey participants provide insights into the value of various attributes. Id. Using conjoint analysis, plaintiff’s expert estimated the market’s willingness to pay for the patented technology as an incremental benefit in the accused products. Id. at *12.

In deciding the motion, the court conducted a detailed analysis of each element of the analysis and measured it against the Daubert standard. Id. at *11 – *18. Ultimately, the court concluded plaintiff’s expert would be allowed to testify regarding his conjoint analysis, denying the motion. Id.