Extract to table

The rebuttal report must demonstrate that Dr

Volkov identifies an alternative technical approach that does not literally infringe OWS's patents, that alternative must be shown to be practically available — i

B above, then the displacement figure must be adjusted upward, not downward

Volkov relies upon to support a lower rate must be scrutinized for comparability

by arguing that they involved smaller licensees or different market conditions) must be weighed against the fact that a license with a larger, more directly competitive licensee like Lumicore would command a higher rate, not a lower one

While the availability of non-infringing alternatives is relevant under Georgia-Pacific Factor 6, it must be assessed based on the actual facts — and, as discussed in Section III