This project was completed by Intensity. Intensity joined Secretariat on February 1, 2023.
A biopharmaceutical company had exclusively licensed a patent related to CAR-T therapy, a novel type of cancer immunotherapy that modifies a patient’s T cells to target and kill cancer more effectively. Its primary competitor had previously attempted to license and invalidate the patent, but failed at both. Despite being aware of potential infringement claims against its therapy, the competitor prioritized being first to market for its lead indication, attempting to lock in a sizeable portion of what was viewed to be a blockbuster marketplace. Upon its competitor achieving FDA approval, the company filed patent infringement claims against its competitor and its therapy.
Intensity was called upon to evaluate the damages related to the alleged infringement. For this project, Intensity conducted economic analysis and provided trial testimony to determine reasonable royalties. This included an assessment of the economic contribution of the patented technology to the allegedly infringing product, availability of potential non-infringing alternatives, stage of development of licensed technology, competitive relationship between the two parties, financial harms and benefits from use of the patented technology by the alleged infringer, and market analysis of related license agreements. As part of its work, Intensity evaluated all fifteen of the Georgia-Pacific factors.
Intensity submitted an expert report and provided expert testimony at deposition and trial. After an eight-day trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Intensity’s client with a damages award that precisely matched the trial testimony.
Economic issues included: Apportionment; Discounted Cash Flow; Licensing; Reasonable Royalty; Valuation.
Why Funder Forecasts Don’t Belong in Royalty Analysis
This article originally appeared on Law360 on June 24, 2025. In a recent article published by Law360, Managing Director Rick Eichmann explores the economic reasoning behind the U.S. District Court’s decision in Haptic Inc. v. Apple Inc. and why prelitigation funding forecasts should not be conflated with royalty analyses in patent litigation. Eichmann explains how models developed for […]
SFO’s ‘Cast-Iron Guarantee’ on Self-Reporting Comes With Fine Print
Ben Boorer, writing for Corporate Compliance Insights, examines the UK Serious Fraud Office’s clearest commitment yet to corporate self-reporting, offering a “cast-iron guarantee” of DPA negotiations for companies that self-report and cooperate. The guidance sets out defined timelines intended to bring greater predictability, but uncertainties remain around how much investigation is expected before reporting, what […]
Strengthening Export Control Compliance: Advanced Strategies for Third-Party Audits
This article first appeared on Law360 on July 7, 2025. In a recent Law360 article, Michael H. Huneke of Hughes Hubbard & Reed and John Rademacher and Abby Williams of Secretariat explore advanced strategies for strengthening export control compliance through improved third-party audits. U.S. technologies continue to be diverted to foreign adversaries, often through networks of resellers […]