Venue, in the context of the federal law, refers to the judicial district in which a case can be heard. Venue must be established for each cause of action in a case. In most federal civil litigation, proper venue is...more
There can be no dispute that Texas federal district courts are a favored venue for patent litigants. In 2020, approximately 4,000 patent cases were filed in district courts throughout the country. Of those cases, more than...more
The patent landscape experienced a paradigm shift with the May 2017 United States Supreme Court decision in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands. In TC Heartland, venue in patent cases was narrowed to either (1) the...more
The Federal Circuit’s ongoing effort to implement TC Heartland—the Supreme Court’s landmark 2017 patent venue decision—took another step forward in May with In re BigCommerce, Inc., which vacated and remanded two decisions...more
It’s been one year since the TC Heartland decision was issued by the Supreme Court, and it’s had a big impact on patent litigation. See TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Food Brands LLC, 137 S. Ct. 1514, 1521 (May 22, 2017)....more
In our continuing coverage of the post-TC Heartland landscape, the Federal Circuit recently clarified that venue is proper in only one district per state in In re BigCommerce, Inc., 2018-122 (Fed. Cir. May 15, 2018) (slip...more
In 2017, the Supreme Court rejected the Federal Circuit’s longstanding interpretation of Personal Jurisdiction and Venue in patent infringement actions against domestic companies. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391, 1400; see TC Heartland LLC...more
In our article “Delaware – the New Black for Patent Litigation” published last May, we wrote about the landmark Supreme Court decision in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands significantly restricting patent suits to...more
In another noteworthy year for patent law, the U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Circuit issued a number of decisions that altered the patent landscape, including four Supreme Court decisions. The topics of the key cases...more
The Supreme Court recently upended what many practitioners considered to be the status quo on the issue of where venue lies in patent infringement actions. These cases have a special governing provision in 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b)...more
For years, patent assertion entities have filed patent lawsuits against retailers in federal court in Texas. The Supreme Court’s recent decision in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC may give retailers the...more
The Federal Circuit issued guidance yesterday for district courts deciding venue challenges after the Supreme Court’s May 2017 decision in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC. In In re Micron Technology, Inc.,...more
The court offers clarification on a patent litigation venue issue that has caused “widespread disagreement” nationwide....more
In an interesting development in the post-TC Heartland world, it appears that the Federal Circuit will soon answer the question whether the Supreme Court’s venue decision was a change in the law, or merely a course-correction...more
On October 20, 2017, District Judge Vernon Broderick (S.D.N.Y.) granted Defendants' Watters Design, Inc.'s, Essense of Australia, Inc.'s, and David's Bridal, Inc.'s motions to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure...more
For decades, companies have been subject to patent infringement lawsuits almost anywhere that they had sales, whether through a physical store or online. Often, based on online sales, the defendant corporation could be...more
In its decision, the Federal Circuit also took the opportunity to clarify the Supreme Court’s recent TC Heartland decision and set forth three general requirements to determine where a defendant maintains “a regular and...more
Brief Summary The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that to find a “required and established place of business” for venue in a civil action for patent infringement, the court must identify “a physical...more
On September 21, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in In re: Cray Inc. clarifying how district courts should determine whether a patent infringement defendant maintains a “regular and...more
In May 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods reversed more than 25 years of Federal Circuit precedent when it held that for venue purposes a corporation is resident only in its state of incorporation. In...more
On May 22, 2017, in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, the Supreme Court reversed decades of expansive patent venue interpretation by the Federal Circuit. A succinct 10-page opinion by Justice Thomas...more
The Supreme Court’s decision five months ago in TC Heartland v. Kraft Food Group Brands was a sea change in the way courts interpret venue for patent infringement cases. Since the Federal Circuit’s decision in VE Holding...more
The United States Supreme Court’s May decision in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC was widely seen as a limitation on the jurisdictions in which a patent owner can file infringement claims. That decision set...more
Supreme Court Hits Reset on Patent Venue Law in TC Heartland - In the recent TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC decision, the Supreme Court reversed nearly thirty years of patent venue law and held that a...more
When the US Supreme Court decision in TC Heartland was published, many patent practitioners thought that the decision would adversely affect the Eastern District of Texas, a popular venue for patentees because of its quick...more