Rembrandt Vision Technologies, L.P. v. Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
818 F.3d 1320 (2016)
Rembrandt Vision Technologies, L.P. (Rembrandt) (plaintiff) sued Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc. (JJVC) (defendant) for allegedly infringing a contact-lens patent. At trial, the dispute centered on whether the lenses’ surface layer and softness differed enough to avoid infringement. Both sides presented experts at trial. Because Rembrandt’s expert drastically changed his testimony and contradicted his own report, the trial court struck his testimony. JJVC’s expert testified that its lenses did not meet the surface layer limitations of the patent but did not testify about the softness limitation. The jury found JJVC’s lenses noninfringing, and JJVC requested judgment as a matter of law (JMOL). The judge entered JMOL for JVCC, noting that without its expert testimony, Rembrandt lacked any evidence about the lenses’ softness. But after trial, Rembrandt discovered that JJVC’s expert had testified falsely. Specifically, JJVC’s expert testified that he personally tested the lenses when graduate students and lab supervisors had actually performed the testing. The expert himself was apparently out of the country during some of the testing. The expert also overstated his qualifications on certain testing methodologies, despite having no experience with them, and withheld test results and data analysis that undermined his opinions and testimony. Rembrandt requested a new trial, arguing it could not fully and fairly prepare its case without the data the expert withheld. The trial court denied a new trial, and Rembrandt appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Stoll, J.)
Dissent (Dyk, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 724,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 724,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,600 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.