Contracts — reasonable royalties

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Civil

Contracts — reasonable royalties

Where a plaintiff failed to argue a theory of liability at trial, the district court could not grant judgment on that theory, however valid.

“We do not understand the reasons he has taken that position, but we cannot rescue the jury’s verdict based on a reasonable royalty theory that he has abjured repeatedly in the district court and in this court, so that NeuroScience never had an opportunity or a reason to respond to the theory. Cf. Pactiv Corp. v. Rupert, 724 F.3d 999, 1001 (7th Cir. 2013) (district judges ‘sometimes have the authority to relieve parties of their forfeitures …, but if they do this they must notify the other side, so that it can meet the argument’); Southern Illinois Riverboat Casino Cruises, Inc. v. Triangle Insulation and Sheet Metal Co., 302 F.3d 667, 677–78 (7th Cir. 2002) (district judge may decide case based on issue the court has raised sua sponte but must first give parties notice and opportunity to respond) In this case, the district court correctly found that Vojdani had simply failed to present to the jury the only theory that might have supported a damages award for the breach of the confidentiality agreement, so NeuroScience never had an opportunity to offer evidence or argument on the theory.”

Affirmed.

13-1354 & 13-1242 Vojdani v. Pharmsan Labs, Inc.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, Conley, J., Hamilton, J.