5 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 30 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Gregory Johnson v. Arkema, Incorporated.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gregory Johnson v. Arkema, Incorporated Anchor | green | “need not prove to the judge that the expert's testimony is correct....” | 14 |
| 2 | Summit 6, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | green | “but where the methodology is reasonable and its data or evidence are sufficiently tied to the facts of the case, the gatekeeping role of the court is satisfied, and the inquiry on the correctness of the methodology and of the results produced thereunder belongs to the factfinder.” | 6 |
| 3 | Elbit Systems Land and C4i Ltd v. Hughes Network Systems, LLC | green | “use of actual past licenses and negotiations to inform the hypothetical negotiation does not 'require identity of circumstances.” | 4 |
| 4 | Vectura Limited v. Glaxosmithkline LLC | green | “effectively assumes that the negotiators of a comparable license settled on a royalty rate and royalty base combination embodying the value of the asserted patent.” | 3 |
| 5 | Vectura Limited v. Glaxosmithkline LLC | green | “that when a sufficiently comparable license is used as the basis for determining the appropriate royalty, further apportionment may not necessarily be required.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.