Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica, Inc. v. Schering-Plough Corp. et al.
Economic Advice in Litigation
The Situation
A New Jersey jury concluded in 2000 that Schering-Plough had infringed (under the doctrine of equivalents) a patent related to a vaccine for Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome ("PRRS"). The verdict was upheld on appeal, and a second jury trial was set to determine damages and whether Schering's infringement had been willful.
NERA's Role
Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica ("BIV") contended that it had suffered damages of between $17.1 million and $29 million, depending upon assumptions made about market definition and the elasticity of demand for PRRS vaccines. A NERA economist testified on behalf of Schering-Plough that BIV's damages were between $4.8 and $6.9 million.
The Result
In June 2004, the jury awarded damages of $6.9 million, and also concluded that the infringement had not been willful.
