Apportioning Patent Damages: Analysis, Calculations for Multi-Component Products, Impact of Claim Scope

Implications of Apportionment for Patent Drafting, Licensing and Enforcement

Recording of a 90-minute premium CLE webinar with Q&A

Conducted on Thursday, December 6, 2018

Recorded event now available

or call 1-800-926-7926
Course Materials

This CLE course will guide patent counsel on apportionment of patent damages. The panel will review how the courts have treated the issue of damages apportionment and will discuss the damages analysis as well as calculating damages for multi-component products. The panel will also consider how apportionment is affected by claim scope and the impact on patent drafting, licensing and enforcement.


In Jan. 2018, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals addressed the issue of apportioning damages in two patent cases—Exmark Manufacturing Co. v. Briggs & Stratton Power Products Group and Finjan v. Blue Coat Systems. These two cases address the need for apportionment, and the complexity of identifying an appropriate royalty base in consumer products, software and other multi-component products.

The damages hinge on the scope of the claims and create a challenge for the patent owner. A broader claim typically covers a more extensive range of products. However, it also raises the likelihood of unpatented elements in the product and thereby limiting recoverable damages.

Potential damages also play a role during patent clearance and licensing discussions. Further, patent prosecutors should keep the damages analysis in mind when drafting patent applications and claims to maximize value, particularly when multi-component products are involved.

Listen as our authoritative panel of patent attorneys examines recent Federal Circuit decisions and how the courts have treated the issue of damages apportionment. The panel will also discuss the damages analysis and calculating damages for multi-component products. The panel will consider how apportionment is affected by claim scope and how patent prosecutors should approach patent drafting in light of the damages analysis.



  1. Court treatment of damages apportionment
    1. Exmark Mfg. Co. v. Briggs & Stratton Power Products Group (Fed. Cir. 2018)
    2. Finjan v. Blue Coat Sys. (Fed. Cir. 2018)
  2. Calculating damages
    1. Analysis
    2. When multi-component products are involved
  3. Impact of claim scope
  4. Impact of damages apportionment
    1. Patent drafting
    2. Licensing
    3. Enforcement


The panel will review these and other highly relevant issues:

  • How does the claim scope impact apportionment?
  • How can counsel draft patent claims to maximize the value of the invention?
  • What litigation strategies can companies and their counsel employ to improve their damages analysis?


Holtslander, Alyssa
Alyssa J. Holtslander

Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner

To provide well-rounded intellectual property services, Ms. Holtslander draws on her experience in post-grant...  |  Read More

Totten, Jeffrey
Jeffrey C. Totten

Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner

Mr. Totten focuses his practice on patent and trade secret litigation, post-grant validity challenges, and client...  |  Read More

Access Anytime, Anywhere

Strafford will process CLE credit for one person on each recording. All formats include course handouts.

To find out which recorded format will provide the best CLE option, select your state:

CLE On-Demand Video