Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 29 JUNE 2017

Intellectual Property Newsletter Jun 21st 2017

A&O Shearman
A&O Shearman
Contributor

A&O Shearman

Introducing A&O Shearman Unparalleled global depth for a changing world. Today more than ever,...

View firm profile
Explore more from A&O Shearman

The patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), provides that patent infringement actions "may be brought in the judicial district where the defendant resides...

United StatesIntellectual Property

More Trouble Brewing in the Heartland: Foreign Corporation Immunity and Other Issues Arising from the Supreme Court's Venue Decision

The patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), provides that patent infringement actions "may be brought in the judicial district where the defendant resides, or where the defendant has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business." For over 25 years, since Congress amended the general venue statute and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its decision in VE Holding v. Johnson Gas, 917 F.2d 1574 (1990), courts have looked to § 1391(c), the "residency" part of the general venue statute, for the definition of the word "resides" to be used in § 1400(b) venue analyses, and as a result have found venue to be proper for a patent-defendant corporation in any district where the corporation is subject to personal jurisdiction. But in May of this year, the Supreme Court overruled

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from