Our News & Articles

On behalf of Remini Street, Mr. Hampton testified as a damages expert to Oracle’s lost profit, the value of Remini Street’s use of the copyrighted works, and deductible costs.

An accounting of a defendant’s profit is an often-used economic remedy for copyright infringement under the Federal Copyright Act. Last year, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that a defendant “may retain the return on investment shown to be attributable to its own enterprise, as distinct from the value created by the infringed work.”

Sprint Spectrum L.P. retained Scott Hampton as a damages expert to testify on Sprint’s behalf as to the amount of reasonable royalty damages.

McDermott Will & Emery LLP retained Hampton IP as a patent damages expert in the University of Utah Research Foundation et al. v. Ambry Genetics Corp. case.

In February 2011, Hampton IP sponsored and participated in the Utah Bar Association’s annual IP Summit.

Baker Williams Mattiesen LLP’s Houston, Texas office, engaged Hampton IP & Economic Consultants on the Nordstrom, Inc. et al. v. 7525419 Canada Inc. d/b/a Beyond The Rack, et al. trademark infringement case.

Baker & McKenzie retained Hampton IP as a damages expert on the Wonderland Nursery Goods Company v. Thorley Industries, LLC patent infringement case.

On August 30, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its Laser Dynamics, Inc. v. Quanta Computer, Inc. opinion, which addressed the Entire Market Value Rule (“EMVR”) and other damage issues.

Nixon & Vanderhye and TouchTunes Music Corp. retained Hampton IP as a damage expert on the TouchTunes Music Corp. v. Rowe International, Corp. et al. case, in the United States District Court Southern District of New York, case number 1:07-cv-11450-RWS.

Damage experts are often asked to calculate copyright damages based on revenues earned from the sale of products and services other than the copyrighted work.

Scott Hampton was retained by Evanston Insurance Co. as a damages expert for MGA Entertainment, Inc., et al. v. Hartford Insurance Company of the Midwest, et al., case number 08-cv-00457, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

Scott Hampton was retained by Rimini Street, Inc. as a damages expert for Oracle USA, Inc., et al. v. Rimini Street, Inc., et al., case number 2:10-cv-0106, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada.

Scott Hampton was retained by Hamilton Beach as a damages expert for Hamilton Beach Brands, Inc. v. Sunbeam Products, Inc., case number 3:11CV345, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s January 4, 2011 Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation decision made (as a matter of law) the 25 percent rule of thumb a flawed tool for determining a baseline royalty rate in a hypothetical negotiation. The Uniloc decision also cast light on the Federal Circuit’s latest thinking regarding application of the entire market value rule.

Scott Hampton was retained by Medicis Pharmaceutical as a damages expert for Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation v. Acella Pharmaceuticals, LLC, case number 2:10-cv-01780, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona.

The law firm of Fenwick & West LLP, on behalf of National Products, Inc., engaged Hampton IP & Economic Consultants to provide an opinion of damages arising from Gamber-Johnson, LLC’s false advertising, unfair competition, and unjust enrichment in the case titled National Products, Inc. v. Gamber-Johnson, LLC, in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle, case number C08-0049C.

Title 35, Section 284 of the United States Code, often referred to as the patent statute, states that patent infringement damages should be in an amount adequate to compensate the patent holder for the defendant’s infringement of the patent-at-issue, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use of the invention.

Scott Hampton was retained by Sharp Corporation as a damages expert for Advanced Technology Incubator, Inc. v. Sharp Corporation, case number 2:07-CV-468, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division.

On January 4, 2011, the Federal Circuit found the “25% Rule” to be inadmissible as a basis for reasonable royalty damages in its Uniloc USA v. Microsoft opinion.

In February 2009, Hampton IP, then using the trade name Campos & Stratis, sponsored and participated in the Utah Bar Association’s annual IP Summit.