Overview
Insight Economics has been retained on multiple cases related to the evaluation of a secondary consideration of a patent’s alleged non-obviousness, the commercial success of the patented product that can be attributed to that patent. In the Alcon vs. Padagis case Insight Economics was retained by Padagis to evaluate claims of commercial success related to an ophthalmic drug and a patent.

Challenge
Insight Economics’ expert testified to multiple factors that indicated that Alcon’s expert did not consider the nexus, or the degree of connection between the product’s sales and the claimed benefits of the specific patents at issue versus other factors. Insight Economics’ expert also testified to a blocking patent acting as a deterrent for other market players.

Challenge
The district court judge ruled in favor of Padagis regarding noninfringement. The judge did not clarify whether either experts’ analysis of sales and revenue data was more persuasive, but did state that Alcon failed to establish a nexus between the alleged commercial success of the product and the claimed invention. Additionally, the judge stated that potential competitors facing a blocking patent significantly undercuts Alcon’s claims of commercial success.