Advanced Survey Research for Complex IP Litigation
Charles L Mauro CHFP
Founder and President of Mauro Usability Science / Neuroscience-based Design Research / IP Expert
How We Support Leading IP Litigation Teams
Advanced Survey Research: If you face complex, high-risk IP litigation covering design patents, trademarks, copyright, trade dress, or utility patents, you understand the importance of robust consumer survey data. Over the past 45 years, we have executed many complex surveys, lab studies, and data-gathering efforts for leading corporations and law firms. Below is a summary of our specialized survey expertise in each primary legal IP framework.
Expert Testimony and Analysis: Charles L. Mauro, CHFP, has been an expert witness in over 100 major cases involving design patents, copyright, trade dress, and utility patent matters. We continue to offer science-based expert testimony for world-class corporations and startups. We combine our advanced survey methods with robust expert testimony and analysis when required. Below are detailed descriptions of our specialized survey offerings for each critical IP framework. Please feel free to ask for more information.
Charles L. Mauro CHFP / Cmauro@MauroUsabilityScience.Com
Specialized IP Survey Offerings
Design Patents: Empirical Ordinary Observer Test (EOOT)
Design patent litigation has rapidly become even more complex and uncertain based on the improper application of the ordinary observer test at MSJ and trial. To address this vexing problem, our research division has developed the world's first fully-validated Empirical Ordinary Observer Test (EOOT). The U.S. Courts have recently accepted the methodology. EOOT provides legal teams with objective, survey-based data on whether a large sample of ordinary observers (consumers) rates two products as substantially the same. The EOOT methodology reduces reliance on conflicting design experts and is an empirical view of consumer response. For the first time, the EOOT methodology brings to the finder of fact scientifically valid data on how the actual consumer rates substantial similarity of patented vs. accused products. EOOT is a highly structured survey methodology based on modern neuroscience that provides demanding legal teams with consumer research on the questions of substantial similarity and the value of design in the context of damages. Clients utilize the EOOT before filing litigation, as a component of MSJ, and in support of legal strategy at trial. EOOT is a robust methodology for assessing the likelihood of success in complex design patent litigation.
Read our EOOT validation paper here.
For more information, email a partner at: Cmauro@MauroUsabilityScience.Com
Copyright: Empirical Substantial Similarity Test (ESST)
The use of copyright as a framework for protecting physical products and other design content is rapidly expanding. This trend and recent significant decisions emphasize the need for objective research data to support your legal strategy. Increasing evidence shows that using academic experts leaves juries confused and without understandable data for critical decision-making. Utilizing the validated framework developed for the Empirical Ordinary Observer Test (above), our research team designed and validated the world's first Empirical Substantial Similarity Test (ESST) for use in complex copyright litigation. ESST provides legal teams with objective, survey-based data on how a large sample of consumers rate the substantial similarity of copyrighted subject matter, including products, music, and other creative content suitable for data capture utilizing our advanced survey methodology. This structured survey system is based on modern neuroscience and provides demanding legal teams with robust science-based consumer research on substantial similarity for copyrighted creative content. The ESST methodology is specifically designed to reduce reliance on academic experts in copyright litigation and bring to the finder of fact scientifically valid data on how the actual consumer of copyrighted materials judges substantial similarity. Clients utilize the ESST before filing litigation as a component of MSJ and in support of their legal strategy at trial. ESST is a robust methodology for assessing the likelihood of success in complex copyright litigation.
For more information, email a partner at: Cmauro@MauroUsabilityScience.Com
Trademark: Empirical Trademark Likelihood of Confusion and Secondary Meaning Test (ETMT)
Utilizing the validated framework developed for the Empirical Ordinary Observer Test, our research team has designed and validated the world's first Empirical Trademark Likelihood of Confusion and Secondary Meaning Test survey methodology. The ETMT provides legal teams with objective, survey-based data on how a large sample of potential purchasers/consumers rate the confusion and secondary meaning of trademark materials, including all acceptable trademark content suitable for data capture utilizing our advanced survey methodology. This structured survey methodology based on modern neuroscience provides demanding legal teams with robust science-based consumer research on the likelihood of confusion and secondary meaning for trademarked content. The ETMT methodology is also explicitly designed to reduce reliance on academic experts in trademark litigation and to therefore bring to the finder of fact scientifically valid data on how the potential purchaser/consumer exhibits a likelihood of confusion or reports secondary meaning. Clients utilize the ETMT before filing litigation as a component of MSJ and in support of their legal strategy at trial. ETMT is a robust methodology for assessing the likelihood of success in complex trademark litigation.
For more information, email a partner at: Cmauro@MauroUsabilityScience.Com
Recommended by LinkedIn
Trade Dress: Empirical Trade Dress Likelihood of Confusion and Secondary Meaning Test (ETDT)
Utilizing the validated framework developed for the Empirical Ordinary Observer Test, our research team has designed and validated the world's first Empirical Trade Dress Likelihood of Confusion and Secondary Meaning Test survey methodology, explicitly focusing on trade dress matters. The ETDT provides legal teams with objective, survey-based data on how a large sample of potential purchasers/consumers rate the confusion and secondary meaning of trade dress materials, including all acceptable trade dress content suitable for data capture utilizing our advanced survey methodology. This structured survey methodology based on modern neuroscience provides demanding legal teams with robust science-based consumer research on the likelihood of confusion and secondary meaning for trade dress content. The ETDT methodology is specifically designed to reduce reliance on academic experts in trade dress litigation and to therefore bring to the finder of fact scientifically valid data on how the potential purchaser/consumer of trade dress materials rates both confusion and secondary meaning. Clients utilize the ETDT before filing litigation as a component of MSJ and in support of their legal strategy at trial. ETDT is a robust methodology for assessing the likelihood of success in complex trade dress litigation.
For more information, email a partner at: Cmauro@MauroUsabilityScience.Com
Utility Patents: Empirical Utility Patent Test (EUPT)
Providing objective research on critical utility patent legal issues has long been a challenge for legal teams on both sides of complex cases. Our research team designed and validated the world's first Empirical Utility Patent Test (EUPT) based on client requests. EUPT provides legal teams with objective, survey-based data on how persons of ordinary skill in the art rate utility patent claims on the dimensions of 101, 102, 103, and 112. For the first time, this structured survey methodology provides demanding legal teams with robust science-based research on several dimensions of utility patent litigation. The EUPT methodology is specifically designed to reduce reliance on academic experts in utility patent litigation and bring to the finder of fact scientifically valid data on how actual persons of ordinary skill in the art respond to critical utility patent litigation questions. Clients utilize the EUPT before filing litigation, as a component of claim construction, as a component of MSJ, and to support their legal strategy at trial. EUPT is a robust methodology for assessing the likelihood of success in complex utility patent litigation.
For more information, email a partner at: Cmauro@MauroUsabilityScience.Com
Specialized IP Litigation Research Studies
We are known industry-wide for our exceptional and creative research study design capability. If you have an unusual question, our research team can employ combinations of advanced neuroscience-based methodologies to create new surveys and/or lab-based studies to address IP research questions outside the scope of the traditional IP litigation tests described above. We are frequently retained to conduct IP research studies to answer complex or unusual questions about consumer response in the marketplace. Our team comprises experts in research design, survey design, statistical analysis, human factors science, neuroscience, and product design. We remain an industry leader in applying neuroscience-based research methods to complex IP litigation questions. Below is a list of validated and advanced testing methods for answering your most difficult questions. We also maintain the most extensive professional research library in human factors science, including a comprehensive database of published scientific articles.
Advanced, Fully-validated Methods For IP Research Questions
Email Charles L. Mauro CHFP / Cmauro@MauroUsabilityScience.Com
Tags: #designresearch #intellectualproperty #design #litigation #patents #iplaw #uspto #expertwitness #designexperts #productdesign #idsa #productresearch #maurousabilityscience #consumerinsights #consumerbehavior #intellectualpropertylaw #legalinnovation #legalknowledge #legalops #consumerresearch Perry SaidmanGeorge RaynalIvy Clarice EstoestaTracy-Gene G. DurkinJoel DelmanAndrew (A.J.) TibbettsQuin HoellwarthTrevor McIntyre AppleGoogleAmazonAmazon Lab126MicrosoftBose CorporationFacebookArtCenter College of DesignPeter MenellChristopher V. Carani, Esq.Dunstan BarnesDr. Jeffrey FunkNikeElizabeth FerrillDysonDavid HodgeGordon BruceCharles L Mauro CHFPStrykerIvan Savov, FARPIMauritz KopMark Lemley
Copyright Mauro Usability Science 2023; all rights reserved
Design Patent Law Expert
1yCharles, this sounds super helpful. Hopefully, it will bring some needed objective evidence to these previously subjective issues.