Federal Circuit rules expert testimony on patent damages properly admitted into evidence.

In a recent case, the Federal Circuit held that an expert's testimony was properly admitted into evidence over defendants' Daubert objections [see Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993)] because defendants did not object to the principles or methodologies employed by the expert; rather, they had objected only to the underlying facts on which the expert had relied. [Micro Chem., Inc. v. Lextron, Inc., No. 02-1155, 2003 WL 161834 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 24, 2003).] Noting that the case was a "classic example of competing experts," the Federal Circuit held that expert testimony is not "legally erroneous" simply because it is "based on [one party's] version of the disputed facts."

Micro Chemical, Inc., a company that provides goods and services to cattle feedlots, owns US Patent No. 5,315,505, which claims a computer system that tracks health histories and medical treatments of cattle and other livestock. …