1-Hour Program

See Credit Details Below

Overview

On May 22, 2017, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, No. 16-341, reversing the Federal Circuit’s denial of a petition for writ of mandamus seeking a transfer of venue in the case to the petitioner’s home district. 

The Supreme Court’s ruling will upend decades-old practices with respect to venue in patent cases.  Rather than permitting infringement actions to be prosecuted in any district where a corporation is subject to personal jurisdiction, TC Heartland will require patentees to hew to specific statutory requirements to establish venue over accused infringers.  The Supreme Court’s opinion, which focused on its own past decisions in this area and the statutory language, also demonstrates that the Court will not hesitate to do away with settled Federal Circuit precedent. 

Specific topics covered by the Briefing, to be given by Eugene M. Paige of Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP, will include: 

• A review of the statutory history, case law, and legal proceedings leading up to the decision
• A summary of the decision, including:
   o the arguments put forth by the parties
   o the historical basis for the Court’s interpretation of the patent venue statute
   o the Court’s treatment of legislative actions and inaction
• The potential impact of the decision on pending and future infringement suits
• The effect of the decision on the distribution of infringement suits around the country
• The significance of the way in which the Court addressed the issues for future cases

Industries

Credit Details