banner ad

Antitrust Economics Expert Witnesses

Sort Non-Featured Profiles by
Check for SynapsUs
Jennifer Vanderhart, PhD
Principal
912 F St. NW, Suite 707
Washington DC 20004
USA
phone: 202-558-5659 (Office) 703-728-7468 (Cell)
Jennifer-Vanderhart-Economic-Damages-Expert-Photo.jpg
Jennifer Vanderhart is a PhD Economist responsible for providing a range of services, including litigation support services, and economic consulting. She specializes in applied Econometrics and Microeconomic Analysis, including theoretical and empirical analysis in the areas of intellectual property, antitrust, breach of contract, international arbitration proceedings, and commercial damages.

Dr. Vanderhart's clients include companies in wide range of industries and retail sectors including education, computer hardware and software, retail merchandising, durable goods manufacturing, mining, tobacco, and financial services.

Prior to joining Analytics Research Group, Dr. Vanderhart was a Managing Director at FTI Consulting. She has also held positions at Exponent, Invotex Group, Navigant Consulting and LECG, and was an instructor at Texas A&M University in the departments of Economics and Management. She has published on valuation, damages and intellectual property and is a frequent speaker on these topics at conferences and lectures.

Litigation Support: Dr. Vanderhart has more than 20 years of experience in the evaluation and quantification of Economic Damages including claims arising from patent, copyright or trademark infringement, trade secret misappropriation, contract disputes, employment discrimination, and claims of expropriation by foreign governments. She has testified in federal and state courts and in domestic and international arbitration proceedings.

Dr. Vanderhart has assisted companies in patent and trademark licensing negotiations, royalty investigations and calculations, and intellectual property and asset valuations. She has also testified in class action proceedings and as to the appropriate data cost-sharing compensation under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).

Areas of Expertise:
  • Damages Calculations & Rebuttal
  • Design Patent Infringement
  • Breach of Contract Damages
  • Statistical Regression Analysis
  • Theft of Intellectual Property
  • Economic Damage Measures
  • Economic Damage Models
  • Trade Dress Infringement
  • Trademark Infringement
  • Lost Earnings (Economics)
  • IP Damages & Valuation
  • Theft of Trade Secrets
  • Telecommunications
  • Damage Calculations
  • Business Damage
  • Damage Analysis
  • Patent Damages
  • Trade Dress (IP)
  • Lost Profits
  • Valuation
  • View Analytics Research Group, LLC's Consulting Profile.
    Check for SynapsUs
    Prof. J. Gregory Sidak
    1717 K Street, NW
    Suite 900
    Washington DC 20006
    USA
    phone: 202-518-5121
    gregory-sidak-logo.jpg
    Gregory Sidak Antitrust Economics ExpertJ. Gregory Sidak is an Expert Economist in the fields of Damages, Antitrust, Patent, Telecommunications Regulation, Commercial and Investment Arbitration, and Intellectual Property Law. Prof. Sidak is Chairman of Criterion Economics, L.L.C. in Washington, D.C. The focus of his research has been regulation of network industries, antitrust policy, the Internet and electronic commerce, intellectual property, and constitutional law issues concerning economic regulation.

    Prof. Sidak formerly served as Deputy General Counsel of the Federal Communications Commission and as Senior Counsel and Economist to the Council of Economic Advisers in the Executive Office of the President. His writings have been cited by the Supreme Court of the United States, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and lower state supreme courts. He has also been cited by the Supreme Court of Canada, the European Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, and other regulatory agencies.

    In a typical engagement, Gregory Sidak assists senior management and outside counsel in devising and executing a litigation or regulatory strategy for addressing a consequential challenge or opportunity. Although he also serves as a court-appointed neutral expert, his typical clients are Fortune 500 companies or their overseas counterparts. Prof. Sidak's comparative advantage is applying economic analysis to novel legal questions that can materially affect the company’s enterprise value. He excels at communicating to legal decision makers the relevance of that economic analysis to answering the pertinent legal questions.

    Areas of Expertise:
    • Damages and Valuation - Trade Secrets, Trademark, Trade Dress, Copyright Infringement, False Advertising, Licensing (Know-How), Patents
    • Technology Disputes
    • Claims of Monopolization Antitrust & Unfair Competition
    • Administrative Proceedings
    • Price-Fixing & Dominance Allegations
    • Trade & Distribution Agreements
    • Competition Regulation and Enforcement in the US and EU
    View Consulting Profile.
    6/17/2015 · Telecommunication
    Regulators in many countries have asserted that setting asymmetric mobile termination rates (MTRs) between the incumbent mobile telephony operator and its smaller rivals is an efficacious means by which to help entrants attain efficient scale. We investigate empirically the efficacy of this policy experiment using data from a global sample of 34 countries from 1996 through 2014. We estimate a model that relates operators' long-run market shares to initial entry conditions and the degree of asymmetry among MTRs using an instrumental variables (IV) strategy. The estimates imply that a high degree of asymmetry among MTRs lowers an entrant's long-run market share by roughly 4 percentage points compared with a regime of symmetric MTRs, and the effect is roughly constant across market penetration levels. Furthermore, mobile operators tend to perform better when entering markets with higher levels of concentration and lower levels of market penetration. Our novel findings cast doubt on the efficacy of imposing asymmetric MTRs as a means to achieve greater equality of competitive outcomes. Our findings inform the larger body of theoretical literature on the pricing of interconnection and network access.

    5/18/2015 · Patents
    Under what conditions may the holder of standard-essential patents (SEPs) seek to enjoin an infringing implementer without breaching the SEP holder's contract with the standard-setting organization (SSO) to provide access to those SEPs on fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory (FRAND) terms? I show that the SEP holder's contractual obligations still permit it to seek an injunction. A FRAND commitment requires the SEP holder to offer a license for the SEPs on FRAND terms (or otherwise to grant implementers access to the SEPs). Extending an offer containing a price within the FRAND range discharges the SEP holder's contractual obligation.

    4/17/2015 · Telecommunication
    In 2005, Ofcom, then telecommunications regulator in the United Kingdom, implemented functional separation of British Telecom plc (BT), separating its wholesale and retail services. BT established a division within the company, Openreach, to provide equal access to its local access network and backhaul products. The tenth anniversary of this regulatory and corporate experiment is an appropriate moment to ask whether functionally separating Openreach from BT benefited consumers. We find that Openreach's creation generated short-run consumer benefits in the form of lower prices but also led to negative long-run effects, which outweighed the short-term price reduction.

    3/18/2015 · Insurance
    Google distributes proprietary applications for its open-source Android mobile operating system (OS) free of charge. Some of those applications (apps) are offered together as a suite of apps known as Google Mobile Services (GMS). Manufacturers of mobile devices can agree, pursuant to Google's Mobile Application Distribution Agreement (MADA), to install the suite of apps on their devices at a price of zero. Some theorize that Google's policy of offering some applications together as a suite of apps harms competitors or menaces consumer welfare.

    2/10/2015 · Patents
    Mark Lemley and Carl Shapiro propose that standard-setting organizations (SSOs) mandate that their members henceforth submit to binding, final-offer arbitration (commonly called "baseball arbitration") to set fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory (FRAND) royalties in licensing disputes concerning standard-essential patents (SEPs). SSOs should reject this proposal. It does not rest on sufficient facts or data, nor does it apply intellectually rigorous principles and methods of law and economics in a reliable manner. This is not to say that the voluntary use of arbitration to resolve FRAND licensing disputes is inherently problematic. However, the incremental efficiency that Lemley and Shapiro claim that their proposal would achieve over litigation or conventional commercial arbitration is illusory. For one, it is much harder to value a portfolio of SEPs over the span of five years than to value an individual baseball player for a single season.

    1/8/2015 · Patents
    What does it mean for a patent holder to commit to a standard-setting organization (SSO) to license its standard-essential patents (SEPs) on fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory (FRAND) terms? When is a royalty FRAND? Drawing from both legal theory and economic theory, I propose an interpretation of FRAND that distinguishes and reconciles the conflicting definitions of FRANDand provides courts a practical approach to identifying FRAND royalties

    12/4/2014 · Economics
    Complex civil litigation routinely includes expert economic testimony. However, determining which expert economist is more credible may confound a lay jury. It may even confound the judge when ruling on the admissibility of expert economic testimony during the Daubert hearing.1 One solution rarely employed is for the court to appoint its own neutral economic expert under Rule 706 of the Federal Rules of Evidence2 when a lawsuit contains a claim for damages that will require rigorous analysis of data. Based on my recent experience as Judge Richard Posner's court-appointed neutral economic expert on damages in patent infringement litigation, I explain in this article how the wider use of Rule 706 would assist the judge and jury and would facilitate the prompt settlement of intellectual property, antitrust, securities, contract, business tort, and other complex disputes.3 The benefits to courts and litigants would surely exceed the costs.

    9/23/2014 · Telecommunication
    As part of the Modification of Final Judgment (MFJ) that implemented the divestiture of the Bell operating companies (BOCs) from AT&T on January 1, 1984, the BOCs were forbidden to carry telephone calls from one local access and transport area LATA) to another. Although the Telecommunications Act of 1996 superseded the MFJ, it retained the BOCs' interLATA prohibition and established, in section 271, a process – involving each state public utilities commission, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and the Department of Justice (DOJ), acting on a state-by-state basis – by which the BOCs could earn regulatory approval to enter the interLATA market within the regions in which they provide local exchange service. As of September 1, 2002, the BOCs had received section 271 authorizations to provide in-region interLATA service in fifteen states.

    8/19/2014 · Antitrust
    A recent phenomenon in competition policy is the acquisition of a private firm by an enterprise that is either wholly owned by government or in the midst of privatization. Such an acquisition poses the question of how public ownership may alter the incentives of a firm to engage in anticompetitive conduct. It also prompts one to examine the process by which such altered incentives revert, as the level of government ownership declines, to the same incentives that face purely private firms. Using Deutsche Telekom's acquisition of VoiceStream Wireless as a case study, this article presents the economic questions relevant to evaluating the competitive consequences of acquisitions by partially privatized firms. It predicts gains or losses to various constituencies of producer groups.

    7/15/2014 · Antitrust
    In this review of John Lott's book, Are Predatory Commitments Credible?: Who Should the Courts Believe?, we find that Lott is more successful in pointing out the likelihood of predatory pricing by public enterprises than in proving that predatory pricing by private enterprises does not occur. In Part I of this Review, we critique Lott's theoretical and empirical attempts to show that predatory pricing by private firms is implausible.

    6/6/2014 · Economics
    Mail delivery is one of the few economic activities that has avoided the wave of deregulation and privatization that has swept network industries over the last few decades. This Article examines several questions regarding the business activities of Canada Post Corporation in a competitive environment. What should be the appropriate mandate of Canada Post? If Canada Post is a natural monopoly, what form of regulation best serves Canadian consumers? If Canada Post's delivery of letter mail is not a natural monopoly, what basis exists for retaining Canada Post's current statutory monopoly? What potential exists for Canada Post to abuse its statutory monopoly-and other statutory privileges and immunities-to compete unfairly against efficient private suppliers of postal services?

    5/1/2014 · Economics
    Few phrases in public policy have become so overused so quickly as the information highway. Although it is unclear to many what that superhighway is or will be, this uncertainty has not prevented proposals to regulate the superhighway from being made. In this Article, we examine the economic principles that should govern competition and regulatory policies concerning the development and operation of the information superhighway.

    3/28/2014 · Antitrust
    Since 1975, when the debate over monopolistic predation began to boil in courts and universities, most discussion has focused on predatory pricing. And although the allegation of predatory innovation arose in some well-known litigation involving Kodak and IBM, lawyers and economists have produced little credible work explaining how this phenomenon can occur, let alone how it should be identified and remedied if deemed to threaten consumer welfare.

    2/19/2014 · Antitrust
    Antitrust law currently lacks a unified theory of liability and damages. But the Supreme Court's recent acceptance of consumer welfare as the goal of antitrust law underscores a growing judicial inclination to construe antitrust liability rules to encourage efficient production and efficient resource allocation. As the Court reconstructs the law of antitrust liability, it should also revise the law of antitrust damages by defining the rights created by those damage measures to accomplish specific economic goals.

    1/21/2014 · Antitrust
    A routine defensive tactic of targets of hostile tender offers is to seek a preliminary injunction under section 16 of the Clayton Act on the ground that the offeror's acquisition of the target's stock would effect a merger violating section 7 of the Act. The litigation costs that an antitrust injunction imposes on an offeror seems unlikely to exceed the offeror's risk-adjusted expected benefit from the takeover. In this Article, I discuss several reasons why the possibility of delay tendes to discourage a potential offeror from ever making a tender offer.

    12/13/2013 · Antitrust
    Through its antitrust enforcement system, society allocates resources to deter anticompetitive behavior. Antitrust enforcement is costly because prosecutors and judges mischaracterize some competitive or efficiency-enhancing behavior as horizontal collusion. In this early application of the Polinsky-Shavell argument about the tradeoff between the probability and magnitude of fines, this essay argues that, given prosecutorial and judicial error, society will not optimally allocate its antitrust enforcement resources by threatening price fixers with exorbitant economic penalties that have only a minimal probability of being enforced.

    11/11/2013 · Antitrust
    Current controversies over patent policy place standard-setting organizations (SSOs) on a collision course with antitrust law. Recent theoretical research conjectures that, in an SSO, patent owners can "hold up" patent users in the sense of demanding high royalties for a patented input after the SSO has adopted the patented technology as an industry standard and manufacturers within the SSO have incurred sunk costs to design end products that incorporate that standard.

    9/23/2013 · Antitrust
    We examine the consumer-welfare implications of Google's project to scan a large proportion of the world's books into digital form and to make these works accessible to consumers through Google Book Search (GBS). In response to a class action alleging copyright infringement, Google has agreed to a settlement with the plaintiffs, which include the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers.

    8/19/2013 · Antitrust
    We favor revision of the Horizontal Merger Guidelines.1 Our preliminary comments in this essay are based on a work in progress that we provisionally entitle, "Favoring Dynamic Competition over Static Competition."

    7/31/2013 · Antitrust
    Competition authorities in foreign jurisdictions have recently adopted or are considering guidelines on applying competition law to intellectual property rights (IPR). A common concern that certain exercises of IPR can restrict competition underlies IPR provisions that would enable competition authorities to compel holders of IPR to license their IP at regulated royalties.

    7/16/2013 · Antitrust
    The OECD's proposed regime of asymmetric ex ante regulation for Mexico's telecommunications marketplace would reduce competition, contrary to the OECD's aims. The OECD's proposals would harm Mexican consumers and force an increase in prices paid for telecommunications services. They would create a government-sanctioned price cartel among the telecommunications providers.

    6/24/2013 · Antitrust
    A recent phenomenon in competition policy is the acquisition of a private firm by an enterprise that is either wholly owned by government or in the midst of privatization.

    6/5/2013 · Antitrust
    agencies in the United States and the European Union began investigating Google's search practices in 2010. Google's critics have consisted mainly of its competitors, particularly Microsoft, Yelp, TripAdvisor, and other search engines.

    5/6/2013 · Antitrust
    The landmark Microsoft case raises challenging questions concerning antitrust remedies. In this Article, we propose a framework for assessing the costs and benefits of different remedies, particularly divestiture, in monopolization cases involving network industries.

    4/2/2013 · Antitrust
    What is the proper legal standard for product integration involving software? Because software is subject to low marginal costs, network effects, and rapid technological innovation, the Supreme Court's existing antitrust rules on tying arrangements, which evolved from industries not possessing such characteristics, are inappropriate.

    2/28/2013 · Antitrust
    A “price squeeze,” or “margin squeeze,” is a theory of antitrust liability under section 2 of the Sherman Act that concerns a vertically integrated monopolist that sells its upstream bottleneck input to firms that compete with the monopolist’s production of a downstream product sold to end users.

    The Telecommunications Act of 1996 sets forth extensive provisions to unbundle the local telecommunications network to encourage the development of a competitive market for local telephone.

    10/22/2012 · Antitrust
    The September 2009 announcement that the Federal Trade Commission and the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice have initiated a review of the Horizontal Merger Guidelines provides a formal process for redefining the proper role of dynamic competition in antitrust law.

    J. Gregory Sidak, Dan Maldoom, Richard A.D. Marsden, Hal J. Singer
    The Brussels Round Table, a forum of leading EU telecommunications operators and equipment manufacturers, commissioned these articles. They examine the deployment of broadband in European countries and make policy recommendations related to telecommunications regulation. Specific topics include pricing flexibility, competition, growth potential, likely future dynamics, competition, investment opportunities, eliminating excess regulation, facilitating longer-term points of view, and suggestions for transparent and competition-neutral subsidies.
    J. Gregory Sidak
    This book addresses deregulatory policies that threaten to reduce or destroy the value of private property in network industries without any accompanying payment of just compensation, policies that are termed "deregulatory takings." The authors further consider the problem of renegotiation of the regulatory contract, which changes the terms and conditions of operation of utility companies.
    J. Gregory Sidak
    Restrictions on foreign investment in U.S. telecommunications firms have harmed the interests of American consumers and investors, argues J. Gregory Sidak in this convincing study. Sidak shows why these restrictions, originally intended to protect America from the perils of wireless telegraphy by foreign agents, should be repealed...
    Check for SynapsUs
    Dr. Edmund H. Mantell
    Economist and Expert Witness
    5 Carthage Lane
    Scarsdale NY 10583
    USA
    phone: 914-725-4882
    fax: 914-722-4147
    Dr. Edmund H. Mantell, Ph.D. is a Consulting Economist and Expert Witness who has been engaged by both Plaintiffs and Defendants. His services are provided rapidly and efficiently.

    Services:
  • Calculations of the loss of earnings and the loss of fringe benefits in personal injury or wrongful death cases
  • Projections of the costs of future care for seriously disabled persons; therapeutic modalities, pharmaceuticals, custodial care, treatment by physicians

    Areas of Expertise:
  • Case Review
  • Forensic Economics
  • Wrongful Death
  • Personal Injury
  • Lost Earnings
  • Securities Experts
  • Spousal Evaluation
  • Economic Damages
  • Calculation of Loss

  • Antitrust
  • Financial Damages
  • Intellectual Property
  • Infringement Damages
  • Disability & Loss of Income
  • Cost of Future Care
  • Trial Exhibit Preparation
  • Analysis of Reports
  • Structured Settlements
  • Check for SynapsUs
    David E. Nolte, CPA
    888 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 2000
    Los Angeles CA 90017
    USA
    phone: 213-787-4100
    fax: 213-891-1300
    Fulcrum-Inquiry-Logo.jpg
    Our analysis and research combined with unique presentation techniques have resulted in an unequaled track record in successful court cases and client recoveries. Our personnel are full time and fully focused on the services we provide. We thoughtfully incorporate technology into our work to provide great results at a more reasonable cost. Our expertise encompasses damages analysis, lost profit studies, business & intangible asset valuations, fraud investigations, statistics, forensic economic analysis royalty audits, strategic & market assessments, competitive surveys, personal injury and employment damages, and a wide range of other financial advisory services. We serve the entire nation.
    11/8/2017 · Economics
    Damage experts don’t always agree regarding the appropriate discount rate and underlying methodology for a lost earnings claim and certain commonly applied methods actually provide a windfall to Plaintiffs. The chosen rate can make a meaningful difference in the economic damages conclusion. A recent article, "Lost Compensation Settlement Tool Allows You To Assess Economic Damages Accurately And Efficiently, Under Various Scenarios", demonstrates the significance of the applied rate on damages.

    8/12/2015 · Accounting
    The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has opened the door significantly wider for those who wish to pursue qui tam False Claims Act suits by reversing a dismissal of two such matters. Ruling en banc in United States ex rel. Hartpence v. Kinetic Concepts, Inc., the Ninth Circuit has removed a prior restriction that any prior public disclosure must have originated from the whistleblower as well.

    A recent case addressed the interesting question of whether a corporation could serve as an expert witness. The matter involved a breach of fiduciary duty case coordinated with an appraisal proceeding, in re Dole Food Company ("Dole"). The defendants designated Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated ("Stifel"), a corporation, to serve as their expert witness regarding the value of Dole.

    2/13/2015 · Patents
    Royalty arrangements within patent licenses have long been constrained by an almost 50 year old Supreme Court decision in Brulotte v. Thys Co that prevents collection of royalties after a patent has expired. The Justices have now agreed to revisit the precedent set by that often-criticized ruling in a current case, Kimble v. Marvel Enterprises, Inc.

    8/16/2014 · Accounting
    In a recent case involving the City of Pomona ("Pomona") v. SQM North America Corporation ("SQM"), Pomona alleged that SQM's importation of sodium nitrate for fertilizer caused a perchlorate contamination in the city. Although the district court excluded under Daubert the expert testimony of Pomona's expert witness on causation, the Ninth Circuit reversed the ruling, stating that "facts casting doubt on the credibility of an expert witness and contested facts regarding the strength of a particular scientific method are questions reserved for the fact finder". The case was remanded for trial.

    7/16/2014 · Accounting
    In association with general cost cutting measures over recent years, many companies have pressured their vendors to reduce fees. This downward pressure has extended to the accounting firms hired to provide independent audit opinions, resulting in a significant drop in audit fees. According to Audit Analytics, audit fees in 2012 were $472 per $1 million of revenue, the lowest amount since 2004. The question is whether audit quality has been sacrificed in order to achieve these reductions.

    4/24/2014 · Damages
    The Eastern District of Texas is well known for its intense patent activity and already provides early disclosure of infringement and invalidity contentions to facilitate faster resolution of these cases. The Court has now taken similar action by providing an option for accelerated damage discovery, including requiring a two week turnaround between defendant's production of potentially infringing sales data and plaintiff's good faith estimate of damages. Accomplishing this will require expert assistance immediately in the process. Even for cases that do not settle, this damage estimate will inform the Court's discovery decisions and resource allocations.

    2/7/2014 · Surveys
    In the course of affirming the district court's decision in Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc., 2013 WL 6017396, Judge Posner went a step further. While upholding the injunction, he ended his assessment with some comments "for future reference" when it comes to consumer surveys offered to demonstrate consumer confusion in support of a trademark infringement claim:

    A recently affirmed decision to grant judgment for the defendant as a matter of law highlights the importance of expert testimony that is consistent with previously-disclosed opinions presented in a Rule 26 report. In Rembrandt Vision Technologies, Inc. v. Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc., the expert's testimony was struck because of critical discrepancies, leaving the plaintiff with no basis for claimed patent infringement.

    9/19/2013 · Legal Issues
    The decision in United States vs. Windsor (No. 12-301, June 26, 2013) by the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) to strike down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) creates important tax issues and opportunities. These include potential refunds for same-sex married couples and their employers for years not closed by the statute of limitations.

    7/10/2013 · Damages
    A Delaware federal court recently closed the door on each of two possible paths to damages for Plaintiff in the matter of AVM Technologies, LLC v. Intel, Inc. (Civil Action No. 10-610-RGA). U.S. District Judge Richard G. Andrews granted Defendant's motion to exclude Plaintiff's expert, while also granting Defendant's motion in limine to preclude any proposed expert testimony from the inventor of the patent in question.

    6/18/2013 · Damages
    Lost compensation is a method of capturing economic damages in personal injury, medical Malpractice, wrongful termination, failure to promote and other similar torts.

    5/21/2013 · Damages
    In a unanimous opinion, the California Supreme Court clarified that trial courts may use either California Evidence Code Sections 801(b) or 802 to admit or exclude the expert's testimony.

    Electronic data comprises a large portion of discovery and provides efficiencies in searching and manipulating the data for further analysis.

    3/11/2013 · Damages
    Plaintiffs often desire short cuts to damage measurements. Given the cost of using experts employing proper methods and data, the temptation is obvious.

    1/22/2013 · Damages
    In re: Apple vs. Motorola, the parties sued each other for patent infringement involving smartphones. Seventh Circuit Judge Richard Posner, sitting by designation, threw out all damage witnesses for both parties on Daubert motions. Then, since both parties lacked damages testimony, he dismissed both cases with prejudice.

    An extraordinary amount of time is incurred in discovery asking for records that may not even exist, or asking for records that do exist, but the other side declines to produce records that were not requested using just the right terms.

    8/27/2012 · Expert Witnessing
    The following suggestions result from my experience serving as a witness, watching hundreds of other expert witnesses, and locating witnesses when servings as a confidential consultant. They are intended to help attorneys avoid common mistakes in selecting an expert witness.

    Appraisal disciplines have a confusing array of credentials. This occurs because:

    Intellectual Property licensing is big business, and is getting bigger. But most licensors do not earn as much as they should because they fail to perform royalty audits allowed under their license agreements.

    The IRS adopted a substantially revised Form 990 that calls for significantly expanded corporate governance disclosures.

    10/28/2005 · Expert Witnessing
    In many respects, the cross-examination of an expert witness is the same as for other witnesses. Some basics include: Be brief…Do not quarrel with the witness…Never ask a question to which you do not already know the answer…Avoid one question too many…and so on. However, there are some important differences

    7/20/2004 · Legal Issues
    If you want to improve your chances of success, commit these ideas to stone. Then follow them religiously.1. Keep it simple This is the greatest commandment, and the one most frequently violated. Too much information in a visual aid will confuse rather than clarify. Creativity does not mean complication. To achieve your goal, invoke the following guidelines

    Computers contain evidence useful in many human resource circumstances. Allegations of discrimination, sexual harassment, and unfair discharge are serious threats that are better understood by knowing what an employee did. Since computers are such a pervasive part of most employees' work lives, analysis of data stored on these computers helps address these issues

    Check for SynapsUs
    Stephen P. Magee, PhD
    President
    1801 Lavaca St. Suite 10E
    Austin TX 78701
    USA
    phone: 512-656-6666
    Magee-Magee-Logo.jpg
    Stephen Magee Finance Economics Expert PhotoStephen P. Magee, PhD, has over 40 years of experience in the fields of Finance and Economics. He is currently the James L. Bayless/Enstar Corporation Professor of Finance and Economics and former chairman of the Department of Finance at the University of Texas at Austin. He holds a PhD in economics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

    Dr. Magee teaches courses in managerial microeconomics and global finance, covering topics including antitrust, intellectual property, company and security valuation, and the cost of capital. Dr. Magee has published nearly 80 academic articles and three books. He has won three major teaching awards and the top career research award at the Graduate School of Business at the University of Texas.

    Dr. Magee’s current research interests include:
    • The Economics of Intellectual Property and Industrial Organization
    • The calculation of Royalty Rates and Patent Infringement Damages
    • Cross-national Economic Effects of Legal Systems and Lawyers
    • The economics of mergers
    • The Supply Effects on Physicians of State Medical Malpractice Reforms
    • International trade
    Dr. Magee has worked on the White House staff and has advised four administrations (Johnson, Nixon, Ford, and George R. W. Bush). In 2003, he presented an academic paper before 1000 international economists at a conference in Havana, Cuba that was attended by Fidel Castro. The paper was on intellectual property and the effect of the informational revolution on economic development. One of Dr. Magee’s books (Black Hole Tariffs) was endorsed on the cover by two Nobel laureates in economics (Stigler and Buchanan) and the chairman at the time of the Nobel committee for economics (Assar Lindbeck).

    Dr. Magee has served on the National Science Foundation Committee for Economics and the Secretary of Commerce’s Economic Advisory Board and on the editorial boards of six academic journals: the Review of International Economics, Journal of Economic Integration, Journal of International Economics, the Review of Economics and Statistics, Economics and Politics, and the International Trade Journal. He has also served as a member of the Brookings Panel on Economic Activity.

    Litigation Support - Dr. Magee has extensive experience as an expert witness for leading companies in the software, computing, e-commerce, internet search, consumer products, healthcare, and petroleum and petrochemical industries. Clients he has testified for include Kodak, DuPont, Microsoft, HP, Cisco, Amazon, Exxon, Dow, Western Union, Becton Dickinson, Mondis and before the Texas Public Utility Commission. He won a $2.4 billion securities case, affirmed on appeal in 2014 and a $156 million antitrust case in 2014, affirmed in 2015 by the Fifth Circuit and affirmed in 2016 by the US Supreme Court.

    Areas of Expertise:
    • Antitrust
    • Econometrics
    • Business & Finance
    • Business Analysis
    • Business Economics
    • Business Interruption / Lost Profits
    • Business Securities
    • Commercial Litigation Damage Analysis
    • Damage Models
    • E-Commerce Economic Analysis
    • Economic Forecasting
  • Economics Finance Infringement
  • Intellectual Property Damages
  • Intellectual Property Valuation
  • International Economics
  • International Trade Litigation
  • Patent Analysis
  • Patent Infringement Damages
  • Trade Secrets
  • Securities / Stock Litigation
  • Statistical Analysis
  • Misappropriation
  • Stephen P. Magee, PhD, et al
    This book provides a special interest theory of protection, developing a full general equilibrium theory that explains the distribution of income with goods markets, factor markets, lobbies, political parties, and voters all pursuing their self interest. This probabilistic voting model shows how well-organized groups can use seemingly irrational government policies to exploit poorly organized groups.
    Stephen P. Magee, PhD
    Stephen P. Magee, PhD
    Check for SynapsUs
    Michael B. McDonald, PhD
    Financial Economist
    76 English Lane
    Shelton CT 06484
    USA
    phone: 203-302-0367
    Michael-McDonald-Financial-Economist-Expert-Photo.jpg
    Michael B. McDonald, PhD, is a professional Financial Economist with a PhD in finance, and a significant background working in finance. His consulting clients and professional work experience includes engagements for Fortune 500 companies, government regulators, and institutional investors.

    Litigation Support - Dr. McDonald is also a university professor of finance, a FINRA arbitrator, and a frequent expert witness in the field of Forensic Economics. He prides himself on being:
    • Adept at bringing dry material to life
    • Proficient with using sophisticated statistical analysis in securities and valuation matters to objectively and effectively make your point in court
    Dr. McDonald specializes in working on cases related to business disputes, economic loss, bankruptcies, spin-offs, and unfair business practices. He has done past consulting work in the following areas:
    • Accounting Fraud
    • Bank Analysis
    • Bankruptcy
    • Business Appraisal
    • Business Analysis
    • Business Economics
    • Business Litigation
    • Business Valuation
    • Corporate Finance
    • Corporate Governance
    • Damage Analysis
  • Damage Models
  • Economic Analysis
  • Economic Forecasting
  • Financial Forecasting
  • Financial Analysis and Assessments
  • Feasibility Studies
  • Municipal Bond Analysis
  • Municipal Distress
  • Risk Assessment
  • Securities Valuation / Litigation
  • Tax Planning
  • Author - Dr. McDonald writes a regular column on valuation in oil and gas markets for OilPrice.com. His writing is often syndicated to TIME Magazine, Yahoo Finance, Business Insider, Seeking Alpha and been cited in the Wall Street Journal, Marketwatch, Bloomberg, and dozens of other financial publications. Dr. McDonald has authored extensive research studies on investments, corporate debt, rates of return to investors under various scenarios, and valuation of tangible and intangible assets.

    Dr. McDonald has authored numerous studies on which he has received various awards from professional organizations like the Academy of Economics and Finance, and the Association of Business and Behavioral Finance.

    View Dr. McDonald's Consulting Profile.
    7/22/2016 · Finance
    In many bankruptcies the choice of how to proceed with a case turns critically on the level of debt the firm has and the sustainability of that debt. Effective negotiations with creditors or arguments in court require marshalling a cogent line of reasoning regarding the ability of a firm to handle the debt that it is carrying. This guide is intended to help attorneys understand the basic financial metrics that objectively determine whether a business can sustain its proposed debt load upon exiting bankruptcy.

    6/15/2016 · Finance
    Abstract: This paper investigates whether firms vary the debt side of their capital structure, based on changes in investor demand for bonds. Examining asset flows into various asset classes over the last 30 years reveals that companies respond to recent increases in demand for bonds from investors by altering their capital structure towards greater use of debt. Firms are more likely to issue debt as demand for bonds rises, and their use of debt increases (decreases) in periods when demand for bonds is high (low) compared to periods when demand is not significantly changed. Firms use more (less) debt when spreads between corporate yields and Treasury rates are low (high), consistent with efforts by managers to adjust their debt issuances based on relative debt costs. These results hold after controlling for seasonality, firm effects, and macroeconomic conditions. These findings suggest that investor demand for debt needs to be taken into account when examining the capital structure puzzle.

    5/6/2016 · Finance
    Let me tell you a sad story; Joe owned a marketing company and earned a prosperous living for several years. Joe's business was growing rapidly and all seemed right with the world. Then a trusted employee left Joe's firm, taking with him half of Joe's customers in violation of his non-compete agreement. Joe's business slowly suffered and lost customers until eventually his firm declared bankruptcy.

    Check for SynapsUs
    EJ Janik, CPA, CFF, CFE
    Principal
    Three Galleria Tower
    13155 Noel Road, Suite 100
    Dallas TX 75240-5090
    USA
    phone: 972-934-0022
    Ryan-Fraud-and-Forensic-Recovery-Logo.jpg
    EJ Janik Accounting Expert PhotoEJ Janik, CPA, CFF, CFE is a Certified Public Accountant with 37 years of professional experience. He specializes in financial audits, compilations and reviews, consulting for commercial litigation, antitrust matters, engineering and construction matters, real estate, and bankruptcy / business reorganizations matters. Mr. Janik holds a Master of Science in Accounting from Louisiana State University and a Bachelor of Commerce from Rice University. He is a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and the Texas Society of Certified Public Accountants.

    Mr. Janik has provided over 150 financial audits and consulted in over 685 business disputes. He has provided expert testimony in over 80 matters including trial testimony in 48 trials or hearings in 8 states. Mr. Janik's accounting services include Damages/Lost Profit analysis, Forensic Accounting, Fraud Investigations, Fact Finding, Financial Analysis, and Expert Witness Testimony when necessary.

    Litigation Experience:
    • Antitrust/Pricing Issues
    • Audits
    • Bankruptcy Analysis
    • Business Interruption
    • Business Valuation
    • Construction Claims
    • Contract Disputes
    • Cost Determinations
    • Criminal Investigations
    • Damage Analysis/Critiques

  • Debt & Capital Analyses
  • Dispute Resolution
  • Due Diligence
  • Environmental Claims
  • Feasibility Studies
  • Forensic Accounting
  • Fraud Investigation/Analysis
  • Hazardous
  • Waste/Remediation
  • Insurance Claims

  • Lost Profits
  • Mergers & Acquisitions
  • Real Estate
  • Royalties, Commissions, Income
  • Solvency
  • Superfund/Environmental Claims
  • Tracing
  • Valuations
  • Wastewater
  • White Collar Crimes
  • Mr. Janik is also uniquely qualified to measure construction claims and damages. With over 11 years of construction experience, he has accumulated over 13,000 Engineering and Construction (E&C) auditing hours, 10,000 E&C consulting hours, and 15,000 E&C supervised hours.

    Construction Claims Services include:
    • Acceleration
    • Change Orders
    • Costs
    • Defective Plans
    • Differing Site and Concealed Conditions
    • Direct Costs
    • Disruption
    • Evaluating Claims
  • Indirect Costs
  • Overhead
  • Payroll Fringe Burdens
  • Profit
  • Pre-Qualification Filings
  • Superfund / Hazardous Waste Sites
  • Terminations
  • Other Construction Issues
  • View EJ Janik's Consulting Profile.

    *Ryan Fraud and Forensic Recovery, LLC is not a CPA firm.