 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||||||
 |
   |
 |
||||||||||
|
> Antitrust |
AEP has extensive experience performing economic analyses of issues relating to all aspects of intellectual property. As such, AEP has been instrumental in cases and studies involving:
|
|||||||||||
| Representative Assignments: | ||||||||||||
|
Polteco, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew Richards, Inc. |
AEP personnel developed a damages study on behalf of Polteco, a technology firm that had developed a high-strength polyethylene for use in artificial joints. The jury found the defendant liable for $74 million in lost royalties for breaching a licensing agreement with Polteco to use its patented high-strength polyethylene. |
|||||||||||
| |
|
|||||||||||
|
Brown
v. Shimano, Inc.
|
The inventor of variable-leverage bicycle drive systems, a technology now almost universally used for mountain bicycles, sued Shimano, a major bicycle manufacturer, for patent infringement. AEP performed a damages analysis that was instrumental in obtaining a substantial settlement against the manufacturer for the plaintiff. As part of the damages analysis, AEP disaggregated the profits derived from the infringing technology from profits derived from other aspects of the bicycle. The basis for the analysis was a survey that estimated how much more a retailer could charge for a bicycle with the infringing technology over a bicycle without the infringing technology. | |||||||||||
|
Patent
Infringement Action against Providers of PBX Systems
|
An inventor alleged that companies providing voice mail systems had violated his patents. As a part of analyzing damages, AEP performed a survey. The survey demonstrated how much more consumers would pay to have a voice mail system that incorporated the infringing features as opposed to a system without these features. The survey results formed the basis for an analysis that isolated the profits from the infringing technology. | |||||||||||
| Patent Infringement against Providers of Waste Disposal Services | An inventor of new methods of safe and environmentally sound disposal of toxic waste sued providers of waste disposal services for patent infringement. AEP estimated damages as a reasonable royalty for use of the technology. | |||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||