Features

The Supreme Court sparked a seismic shift in patent litigation recently when it upset the long-standing interpretation of 28 U.S.C. §1400(b), the special patent venue statute. TC Heartland held that for the purposes of patent venue, the meaning of "resides" in Section 1400(b) is not supplemented by the broad definition of "resides" in the general venue provision, 28 U.S.C. §1391.

Features

Patent owners have taken control of the patent reform debate in the 115th Congress, but it's not clear yet who's supposed to be listening.

Features

<b><i>Supreme Court Turns Back Clock</b></i><p>Although <i>TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods </i> 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.

Features

A Texas company has accused Snap Inc. of infringing four patents with systems that allow Snapchat users to scan "Snapcodes" and add friends on the popular social networking app.

Columns & Departments

Federal Circuit Affirms Non-Infringement Decision Based on Prosecution Disclaimer<br>Federal Circuit Decisions Offer Guidance on Award of Attorney Fees under Section 285

Features

The Supreme Court's decision in <i>Impression Products v. Lexmark</i> is the latest Supreme Court ruling to eviscerate years-long, patentee-friendly Federal Circuit precedent.

Features

Despite leaving unresolved the ambiguity about the effect of secret sales under §102, the <i>Helsinn</i> ruling offers clues to practitioners seeking to avoid the on-sale bar.

Features

Although <i>TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods</i> 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.