FR EA

Extract to table

Pull the structured facts out of a document: parties, dates, amounts, obligations.

Extract to table / reasonable-royalty-georgia-pacific-draft.docx
reasonable-royalty-georgia-pacific-draft.docx · 1014-00003

Parties

Georgia-Pacific Corp
United States Plywood Corp
Apex Claim Analytics LLC
Optiwave Semiconductor Corp
See Georgia-Pacific Corp
Kestrel Partners LLC
Compass Forensic Accounting LLP

Dates

April 26, 2022
February 17, 2023
June 3, 2022
March 14, 2017
March 19, 2019
September 8, 2017
January 14, 2021
June 22, 2018
June 29, 2021
November 15, 2018

Amounts

$187.4
$215
$42.8
$312.8
$1.87
$2.0
$148.6
$11.145
$62.3
$4.6725

Obligations

Critical to this analysis, the Federal Circuit has emphasized that the hypothetical negotiation must be grounded in the facts of the case and supported by sound economic reasoning
However, the specific royalty rates, licensors, and patents covered are not broken out in the public filing and must be obtained through discovery
The rationale is straightforward: a license to a competitor not only provides the licensee with access to the patented technology but also enables the licensee to compete more effectively against the licensor, thereby inflicting competitive harm that must be compensated through the royalty
However, it must be acknowledged that design-around alternatives exist for each patent
6 million in CY 2022 revenue) demonstrates the commercial significance of the technology, but apportionment is required to ensure that the royalty reflects only the value attributable to the patented features
2011), and subsequent Federal Circuit authority, if the royalty base is the entire product price, the patented feature must be the basis for customer demand for the entire product; otherwise, the royalty must be apportioned to reflect only the value of the patented feature