State Industries, Inc., Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Mor-Flo Industries, Inc. And American Appliance Mfg. Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• observing that “the absence of acceptable substitutes” on the market was “a neutral factor” because “all the other competitors [were credited] with their market shares”
• upholding award of lost profits in proportion to pat-entee’s market share of the relevant market including acceptable noninfringing substitutes
• affirming award of lost profits for 40% of market share, and reasonable royalty for the remainder of infringer’s sales
• “Deciding how much to award as damages is not an exact science, and the methodology of assessing and computing damages is committed to the sound discretion of the district court.”
• \The value of collateral sales could also be factored into the royalty rate.\
• “In the two-supplier market, it is reasonable to assume, provided the patent owner has the manufacturing and marketing capabilities, that it would have made the infringer’s sales.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).