Emblaze Ltd. v. Apple Inc.

(Re: Docket Nos. 428 and 430)

ORDER RE: APPLE’S MOTIONS TO EXCLUDE EMBLAZE’S DAMAGES EXPERTS

Before the court are a pair of Daubert *952 motions filed by Apple in this patent case. 1 The motions seek to exclude the opinions of Emblaze damages experts Catharine Lawton and David Teece. After considering the parties’ respective arguments, in both the papers and at the hearing, the court holds that Lawton and Teese may testify at trial, subject to the restrictions laid out below.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Lawton’s Damages Analysis

Lawton’s report analyzed the accused Apple products using the so-called “income approach” method. 2 The income approach

Using the income approach, Lawton calculated the additional gross profit margin on each of the accused products from the date Apple’s http live-streaming (“HLS”) was included. This calculation served as a “high end” starting point for the reconstruction of the hypothetical royalty rate, 4 because the accused products include non-patented features.

Lawton’s rate analysis then turned to the Georgia-Pacific factors. 6 Lawton concluded that factor 2—the rate paid for comparable patents—supported minimum royalty rates in the range of $.10 to…