Andrew Radsch, Andrew Nguyen and Kevin Yang Pen Law360 Article on Brumfield Decision 

Munger, Tolles & Olson Partner Andrew Radsch and Associates Andrew Nguyen and Kevin Yang authored a Law360 article, titled “Columbia Software IP Ruling Tests Royalty Damages Model.” The article examines how courts are addressing questions left open by the Federal Circuit’s 2024 decision in Brumfield v. IBG LLC, which expanded the potential availability of reasonable royalty damages based on foreign sales in U.S. patent cases. 

The attorneys explain that, under Brumfield, patent owners may, under certain conditions, recover reasonable royalty damages based on wholly foreign sales, despite the traditional understanding that U.S. patent law does not apply extraterritorially. Building on the Supreme Court’s decision in WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp., the Federal Circuit held that non-infringing foreign conduct may be included in the royalty base where the patentee can show that the conduct increases the value of the domestic infringement. However, the authors note that Brumfield left significant questions unresolved, including what level of causation is required, whether causation alone is sufficient, how courts should assess foreseeability, and what role longstanding limits on the extraterritorial reach of U.S. patent law should continue to play. 

The article also examines how courts are addressing Brumfield-based damages theories. It discusses the Federal Circuit’s March 2026 decision in Trustees of Columbia University v. Gen Digital Inc., in which the court declined to address a foreign-sales damages theory because it had been waived, and reviews district court decisions that have both permitted and limited such theories depending on the connection between domestic conduct and foreign sales. Together, these decisions highlight the continuing uncertainty surrounding the scope of patent damages after Brumfield. 

Read the full article. (Subscription may be required)