Stout Expert Profile Jeffrey Press

Stout Expert Profile Jeffrey Press

Stout Intellectual Property professional Jeffrey Press discusses his 19 years in IP and Forensic Accounting, his biggest lessons learned, and the most rewarding part of his career.

August 18, 2022

Jeffrey Press is a Managing Director in the Disputes, Compliance, & Investigations group. He has nearly 19 years of experience providing forensic accounting services, including expert testimony in the areas of calculating and testifying to damages in intellectual property and other complex commercial disputes. We spoke to Jeffrey about his career path, his involvement with the AICPA, and how he has witnessed the IP industry change over the course of his career.

Role at Stout


Intellectual Property Damages Expert



B.A., Accounting, Franklin & Marshall College

Areas of Expertise


Patent Infringement Damages
Trademark Infringement Damages
Copyright Infringement Damages
Trade Secret Misappropriation
Labor & Employment Disputes
Complex Business Litigation

Focus Industries


Technology, Media, & Telecommunications
Manufacturing & Equipment
Real Estate, Lodging, & Leisure

Venues Testified In


Pennsylvania State Court
Federal District Court

  • Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • District of Delaware
  • Eastern District of Virginia (Alexandria Division)

Certifications / Designations


Certified Public Accountant (CPA)
Certified in Financial Forensics (CFF)

What types of matters do you work on? In which areas of IP disputes do you have particular expertise?

Over the course of my career, a majority of my IP damages experience has been in patent infringement cases. However, I also work on damages matters involving other types of IP, such as trademarks, trade secrets, and copyrights. These types of IP disputes typically involve damages based on lost profits, reasonable royalties, and disgorgement of profits.

In addition to damages aspects of cases, I have also testified with respect to commercial success in pharmaceutical patent litigation.

What types of clients do you work with? How do you provide value to them?

I primarily work with outside counsel representing either plaintiffs or defendants. The mix of cases I have consulted on is not really weighted toward one side or another. This has really benefited my approach to cases, as it provides a balanced insight into the key areas that are commonly disputed by each party’s damages expert and the ways in which we can best position our opinions to withstand the scrutiny of the opposition and the courts.

One of the best ways I provide value to my clients is really knowing when it is time to listen. No one understands a client’s business better than they do. Every client has aspects of their business that are unique, which can be critical in a damages analysis. It’s essential to give clients the time they need to talk about their business and the things they think are important. Sometimes small details about how a client operates its business or markets its products can make a big difference in a damages analysis.

What makes you particularly qualified as an expert in IP dispute cases?

When I look back on the 19 years I’ve spent in the damages space, I would say I’ve “specialized” in IP compared to other types of cases I’ve worked on. So it’s really the experience I’ve gained over the years. It’s years of seeing cases all the way through from case inception to trial and spending time on all aspects of cases. Getting the chance to develop affirmative or rebuttal theories, being in the weeds of reviewing documents and preparing analyses, working with counsel on discovery responses and witness depositions, and preparing for trial – these experiences have been a key part of my professional development. Over the years, I’ve also recognized the importance of having intellectual honesty and believing in your opinions. If you don’t truly believe in your own opinion, then you open yourself to some pretty strong criticisms. And there’s a good chance that a jury won’t believe your opinion either.

I’ve also had the opportunity to work with the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants as part of its IP damages case law updates. I co-authored the AICPA’s 2020 practice aid update, “Calculating Damages in Intellectual Property Disputes.” This serves as a guide for CPA practitioners as to methods for calculating damages and key case law to consider when serving as an expert witness. This was a multi-year project to update the AICPA’s materials, which required a deep dive into relevant case law that comes into play on almost every IP matter. I continue to monitor the ever-evolving case law to ensure that my damages opinions incorporate the latest thinking.

What led you to focus your career in IP?

IP damages really found me more than I found it. After spending almost five years at a Big 6 accounting firm (yes, there used to be more than four) as an auditor, I transitioned into a forensic accounting practice that had a large amount of IP damages work but not a lot of people at my level that were experienced in it. So it became a natural spot for me to spend a large amount of time. I had also spent the majority of my time as an auditor working with a high-tech government contractor and looking at financial aspects of different technologies in different markets. Working on IP damages cases allowed me to continue getting the kind of variety I was used to, which still exists today after spending 19 years focusing on IP.

How have you witnessed the IP industry and forensic accounting change over the last 19 years?

I started working on IP damages cases in 2003, which allowed me to witness a change in damages approaches and the scrutiny placed on experts by the courts. My first article was “How Reasonable is your Royalty?” in 2008 (I still think we could have done better with the title that we picked), which includes reference to the use of the “25% Rule” as a rule of thumb for determining royalty rates. Well, a few years later, the Federal Circuit came out against the 25% Rule in Uniloc v. Microsoft. This was part of a wave of Federal Circuit opinions that increased the focus on the level of economic rigor placed on patent damages experts, including in areas such as comparable license agreements and the Entire Market Value Rule. These were not new issues in patent damages, but damages experts were strongly reminded of the substantive analysis required when evaluating patent damages.

What was one of your more notable cases and why?

I’ll always look back on my first testimony opportunity as the one case that stands out. I remember it vividly because, during preparation for my deposition, an attorney outwardly expressed their confidence in me, saying that I would make a good witness because I came off as “likeable” and “easy to talk to.” So, naturally, that boosted my own confidence going into my first deposition. But once that deposition started, I very quickly realized how much there was to learn about being an expert witness and good testifier. Testifying isn’t just about knowing what is in my expert report, but it is very much about things that weren’t spelled out in the report. Testifying is also about knowing when and how best to concede versus standing your ground on a position (you don’t have to fight on everything), trying to establish a rapport rather than making things adversarial, or knowing when you’ve said enough (or too much). It really opened my eyes to the “art” of serving as an expert witness.

What has been the most rewarding part of your career?

This line of work gave me an entirely new view of the consultant/client relationship. As an auditor, the relationship with clients could sometimes be strained. But serving as a damages expert brings with it a different type of relationship. While our analyses are objective and we are not serving as advocates, the ultimate clients view our role as one of supporting their business goals. Their willingness to spend time with me and my team and the level of appreciation for the work we do are very rewarding.

Another great benefit is getting to work side by side with counsel and helping them navigate the damages part of their case. Offering insights in areas like discovery, deposition prep, and trial strategies gets us out of the weeds of financial analysis and report writing and allows us to contribute to other aspects of a case.

You’ve had a heavy involvement in the AICPA. Can you describe your experience with the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) and how it has helped develop your career?

From the start of my career, the AICPA always made useful resources available to its members serving as expert witnesses. So getting the chance to co-author the update to the IP practice aid gave me the opportunity to contribute to a resource that would be regularly used by the AICPA’s members. My research for that project served as a reminder of the importance of staying current on the continual flow of damages opinions at the district court and Federal Circuit levels in the IP damages space, especially patent infringement damages. Working with the AICPA has also given me the chance to participate in annual webinars and conferences on case law updates, which keeps the Courts’ views on damages top of mind when performing my own damages analyses. Through this work, I’ve also had the benefit of developing good relationships with other experienced professionals in the IP damages space.

What are the biggest lessons you have learned in your career? What guidance would you give to people early in their career that are pursuing a similar career path?

It really does take a village to do this kind of work. I am very fortunate to be surrounded by some of the best and brightest people I have ever worked with. Stout has amazing talent at all levels, and everyone here has demonstrated a willingness to do whatever it takes to provide the best quality work product to our clients. Whether it’s engaging in a healthy debate about damages theories or putting in whatever work is needed to sift through massive amounts of data, all of Stout’s team members contribute to helping our clients meet their objectives. Across the board, the 50+ members of Stout’s IP group and everyone else across Stout’s other practice areas are top notch, and I feel privileged to work with them.

What interests do you have outside of work?

When I am not at work, I try to spend my free time outside. That typically involves chasing my young boys around, experiencing the great outdoors with my family’s new-found interest in RVing/camping, spending summer weekends at the beach, or hitting golf balls in the yard (since there’s not much time to actually get to a golf course). Inevitably, hitting golf balls in the yard leads to yard work, as finding said golf balls usually involves trimming bushes in order to find them.