Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> FileWrapper

Intellectual Property Law

: FileWrapper

Expert's internally inconsistent testimony could not support jury's infringement verdict

By McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.

In a decision last week, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court's denial of judgment as a matter of law after a jury returned a verdict of infringement.  The Federal Circuit held the jury's verdict was not supported by substantial evidence, and that the plaintiffs' expert's opinions contradicted his factual testimony, and was thus incapable of supporting the jury's verdict of infringement.

Judge Newman dissented.  In her opinion, there was substantial evidence to support the verdict, and the district court properly denied the defendant's motion for judgment as a matter of law, and the majority improperly substituted its interpretation of the evidence for the jury's interpretation.

More detail of Johns Hopkins Univ. v. Datascope Corp. after the jump.

[More]

Full post as published by FileWrapper on October 06, 2008 (boomark / email).