Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Intellectual PropertyFeaturesGeneral Counsel and In House CounselPatent LitigationThe Corporate CounselorUnited States Supreme Court

Patent Infringement

By Christopher Gaspar and Sean Hyberg
July 02, 2017

Although TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, No. 16-341 (May 22, 2017), answers the question of where a domestic corporation resides in patent infringement cases, it does not fully answer the question of where proper venue lies. In a move that many patent litigators had anticipated, the Supreme Court dispensed with the venue option of suing a corporate defendant wherever it could be subject to personal jurisdiction. Now, for purposes of venue in patent lawsuits, corporate defendants reside only in the state of incorporation. But that does not necessarily mean that venue is not proper for corporate defendants outside their state of incorporation. Whereas before, venue was largely taken for granted, the threshold issue of venue and whether a defendant has a “regular and established place of business” is likely to take on a much more prominent role in patent litigation following TC Heartland.

Meaning of 'Residence'

This premium content is locked for The Corporate Counselor subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys Image

Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.

A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.