Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Venue in patent cases lies “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.” 28 U.S.C. §1400(b). Since 1990, the Federal Circuit interpreted the term “resides” coextensively with the general venue statute such that patent venue lay where the defendant was subject to personal jurisdiction. See, VE Holding Corp. v Johnson Gas Appliance Co., 917 F2d 1574, 1578 (1990). Minimum contacts required for personal jurisdiction are substantially less than a “regular and established” place of business. So, the court’s broad definition of “resides” essentially made §1400(b)’s alternative phrase unnecessary. But this year, the Supreme Court greatly narrowed that definition. See, TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, 137 S. Ct. 1514, 1517 (2017). The Federal Circuit, in turn, interpreted the newly-relevant alternative phrase. In re Cray, ___ F.3d ___, 2017 WL 4201535 at 4 (Fed. Cir. 2017). After two decades of relaxed patent venue rules, these decisions work a seismic shift in patent litigation.
By Erin Hennessy, Annie Allison and Logan Kotler
Copyright, Fortnite and the Ability to Protect How You Shake Your Groove Thing
The U.S. Supreme Court just crashed the copyright world’s latest dance party — stepping on the toes of a soiree of copyright infringement lawsuits against videogame developer Epic Games, the creator of Fortnite.
By John P. Isacson
IPRs have now been conducted for several years, and litigation has ensued over the procedures by which they are conducted. Decisions have been rendered by the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which have resolved some issues, created others, and altered procedures.
By Amanda H. Wilcox
Social media is growing up, and this means that brands of all sizes and across all industries are using social media as part of their marketing strategy. However, courts have confirmed that the basic tenets of intellectual property law and advertising law still apply. The following guidelines stem from common questions that clients often have in the area of social media marketing.
By Jeff Ginsberg and Zhiqiang Liu
Federal Circuit Declines to Follow Patent Office’s Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance In Affirming Trial Court’s Decision That Claims Are Directed to Patent-Ineligible Subject Matter