In doing so, the Supreme Court reversed several decades of Federal Circuit jurisprudence, which had been construing the provision more liberally. Many commentators suggest that this may have a chilling effect on new filings in places such as the Eastern District of Texas -- known "rocket dockets" for patent infringement cases.
Supreme Court Narrows Patent Infringement VenueWritten by W. John Eagan
In the case of TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion that is likely to limit the universe of available venues in which a patent holder can bring an action for infringement. Under the particular patent venue statute, the appropriate venue for patent infringement is anywhere infringement has occured, as long as the accused infringer has a regular and established place of business, or where the accused infringer "resides." In the context of a corporation, the definition of residing had been open to interpretation, but the TC Heartland opinion made explicit that residence under the patent venue statute refers only to the state of incorporation.
Mr. Eagan earned his bachelor’s degree in Mechanical Engineering from Lehigh University and his law degree, with honors from the University of Miami. While at the University of Miami he served as the Inter-American Citator and an Articles and Comments Editor for the Inter-American Law Review. Mr. Eagan is admitted to practice law in the State of Florida and concentrates his practice in Intellectual Property litigation.
Latest from W. John Eagan
- Son of Playwright Sues Fox for "The Shape of Water"
- The USPTO During Government Shutdown
- Supreme Court to Determine International Scope of Lost Profits in Patent Infringement Suits
- Supreme Court Limits Laches in Patent Cases
- Supreme Court Rules Design Patent Damages Can Be Limited to "Components" of Products