4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 180: Listen and Learn -- Venue (Federal Civil Procedure)
Coverage Litigation Leapfrog: Why Venue Matters and How to Avoid Pre-emptive Strike Actions
The Evolution of Cross-Border Restructuring Processes
Nota Bene Episode 99: Unpacking the Pendulum of American Patent Policy Then, Now, and Forward with Rob Masters
Chapter 15 Bankruptcy Issues, Venue, and Jurisdiction by Kristhy Peguero and Jennifer Wertz
Bill on Bankruptcy: Delaware to Continue Dominating Bankruptcy
The Federal Circuit has further narrowed the scope of patent venue statute in In re Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., holding that the requisite control a defendant must exercise over an in-district agent to establish patent...more
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
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that the minimum contacts or purposeful availment test for specific personal jurisdiction was satisfied where a patent owner sent multiple infringement notice letters...more
TRIMBLE INC. v. PERDIEMCO LLC - Before Judges Newman, Dyk, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Summary: Repeated email, phone, and letter communications...more
On November 5, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in Valeant Pharmaceuticals N. Am. LLC v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., No. 19-2402, resolved a split among district courts over what constitutes...more
Last week was argument week at the Federal Circuit, which as usual meant the Court issued several Rule 36 affirmances and short non-precedential decisions. But tucked in between those was at least one case—a Hatch-Waxman...more
Somewhat remarkably, there is no settled Federal Circuit precedent regarding where a patentee can bring suit against a generic competitor in Hatch-Waxman litigation under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2). While recognizing that this...more
The Federal Circuit Thursday issued a decision that narrows the venue options available to patent owners bringing suit against generic drug manufacturers under the Hatch-Waxman Act. In a unanimous decision, the court held...more
This program will cover important patent and trademark trends and cases in 2020, including: - The Trademark Modernization (TM) Act of 2020 - Counterfeiting: Tiffany v. Costco - Transformation from Generic to Protectable:...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
On April 17, 2019, Judge Gilstrap of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, in Apicore v. Beloteca, No. 19-cv-00077, held that while the court could exercise personal jurisdiction over a generic...more
A recent decision by the Federal Circuit has broadened the potential for declaratory judgment personal jurisdiction to exist based on letters sent to accused patent infringers in a foreign forum. In Jack Henry & Associates,...more
A recent order from the Northern District of California in AU Optronics Corporation America v. Vista Peak Ventures, LLC, 4:18-cv-04638 (CAND 2019-02-19) (“AU Optronics”), provides further guidance for patent venue analysis...more
Addressing personal jurisdiction for declaratory judgment actions, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that there was personal jurisdiction over the plaintiff, and that there is no generalized rule that...more
Under the patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), a patent suit may be brought in a “judicial district where the defendant resides, or where the defendant has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Newman, Wallach, and Stoll. Appeal from the District Court of the Northern District of Texas. Summary: There is no generalized rule that sending letters alleging patent infringement...more
Venue selection has been a primary focus for the past few years in patent infringement cases. However, a recent Federal Circuit decision serves as a reminder that a court must first be found to be able to exercise personal...more
In our continued post-TC Heartland coverage, the Southern District of New York recently held that an employee’s home office in New York constituted a “regular and established place of business” in the state as required by the...more
A Complaint Identifying Infringing Products and the Patents Allegedly Infringed, Accompanied by Statements that the Products Meet All Elements of at Least One Claim of the Asserted Patents, May be Sufficient to Meet the...more
According to the Eastern District of Texas, no. In our continued post-TC Heartland coverage, for the purpose of establishing venue, courts typically will decline to treat the place of business of one corporation as the place...more
According to a recent decision from the Southern District of New York, no. In our continued post-TC Heartland coverage, the court in CDX Diagnostic, Inc. v. U.S. Endoscopy Group, Inc. clarified that a storage unit does not...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
Praxair Distribution, Inc. v. Mallinckrodt Hospital Products IP Ltd., Appeal Nos. 2016-2616, -2656 (Fed. Cir. May 16, 2018) - In an appeal from a inter partes review, the Federal Circuit reviewed a PTAB obviousness...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before PROST, WALLACH, and TARANTO. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: The patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), does not...more