Globus Argues Expert’s Faked Credentials Warrants New Trial
| Printer friendly version
In 2011, DePuy-Synthes, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson Inc. sued Globus Medical, Inc. in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. In that suit, Synthes alleged that Globus had infringed three Synthes patents (U.S. Patent Nos. 7,846,207; 7,862,616; and 7,875,076) all directed to intervertebral implants.
The jury found that Synthes’ patents were valid and that three of Globus’ intervertebral implant products infringed those patents. The jury awarded Synthes $16 million in damages, representing a 15% royalty on Globus’ sales of infringing products.
In December 2014, Synthes learned that its damages expert, Richard Gering, did not have a Ph.D., as he had testified under oath. Synthes notified the court and Globus the following day.
Globus argued in a brief, filed April 24th, 2015, that it should be granted a new trial because it is impossible to quantify how much the discredited expert’s testimony influenced the jury’s decision. Synthes responded that because Globus did not offer evidence that the expert’s testimony itself was factually incorrect, it could not establish that a new trial is warranted. Mr. Gering testified only on damages, and not on validity or infringement. Therefore, Synthes argued that there is no reason to grant a new trial.
By using this blog, you agree and understand that no information is being provided in the context of any attorney-client relationship. You further agree and understand that nothing herein is intended to be legal advice. This blog is solely informational in nature, and is not intended as, and should not be used as, a substitute for competent legal advice from a retained and licensed attorney in your state. Knobbe Martens LLP makes no representations or warranties as to the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or availability of the information in this blog. Knobbe Martens LLP will not be liable for any injury or damages relating to your use of, or access to, any such information. Knobbe Martens LLP undertakes no obligation to correct or update information on this blog, which may be incorrect or become incorrect or out of date over time. Knobbe Martens LLP reserves the right to alter or delete content or information on the blog at any time. This blog contains links and references to other websites and publications that you may find of interest. Knobbe Martens LLP does not control, promote, endorse or otherwise have any affiliation with any other websites or publications unless those websites or publications expressly state such an affiliation. Knobbe Martens LLP further has no responsibility for, and makes no representations regarding, the content, accuracy or any other aspect of the information in such websites or publications.