Extract to table

Where the proponent cannot meet this burden, the testimony must be excluded regardless of the expert's credentials or experience

As the Federal Circuit has explained, "[w]e have cautioned that district courts must not let the lure of a 'battle of the experts' sideline the court's crucial role in evaluating the reliability of each expert's methodology

The Federal Circuit has repeatedly held that an expert's royalty base must have a "legally and factually sufficient" connection to the patented technology's contribution to the accused product

2015) (recognizing that "the essential requirement is that the ultimate reasonable royalty award must be based on the incremental value that the patented invention adds to the end product")

3d at 1330, the Federal Circuit reaffirmed that "comparable license agreements" must be "sufficiently comparable to the hypothetical license at issue in suit