1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Lack Of Standing Is Fatal To Lost Profits Claim

Lack Of Standing Is Fatal To Lost Profits Claim

Client Alert | 1 min read | 06.04.08

In Mars, Inc. v. Coin Acceptors, Inc., (No. 07-1409, -1436, June 2, 2008), the Federal Circuit affirms a district court's summary judgment excluding Mars' lost profits claim prior to 1996 based upon manufacture and sale by its former subsidiary which was non-exclusively licensed to use Mars' patented technology. However, the determination that Mars had standing to recover damages from 1996 to 2003 is reversed. The Federal Circuit affirms the district court's assessment of a 7% reasonable royalty rate and remands to the district court for recalculation of damages for the period prior to 1996. The panel relies on the Federal Circuit's 2004 Poly-America L.P. v. GSE Licensing Technology, Inc. decision which held that a patent holder is not entitled to recover under a lost profits theory as a result of sales lost by a sister corporation, absent a showing that the patent holder itself or its exclusive licensee had lost profits. Therefore, a non-exclusive licensee such as Mars' subsidiary did not have constitutional standing. Regarding the 1996-2003 period, Mars' lack of standing is found not to have been cured by a Confirmation Agreement transferring back to Mars the rights to the '137 and '719 patents before final judgment.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 08.03.26

New Jersey Takes Aim at Algorithmic and Surveillance Pricing: What Landlords and Retailers Need to Know About the FAIR Act and the Fair Price Protection Act

On July 20, 2026, New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill signed the Forbidding the Algorithmic Inflation of Rent (FAIR) Act into law, making New Jersey the fourth state to regulate algorithmic rent-setting practices. Three days later, on July 23, 2026, Governor Sherrill signed the Fair Price Protection Act, which targets “surveillance pricing”—the practice of using or collecting personal data about a user and using an algorithm or artificial intelligence to charge different consumers different prices for the same products. Together, these laws represent a significant expansion of New Jersey's consumer protection framework in the algorithmic pricing context....