Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
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.
By Alan L. Friel
Part Two of a Two-Part Article
By Scott Graham
The U.S. Supreme Court has jumped into a titanic copyright battle between Oracle Corp. and Google LLC with both barrels. The court’s involvement is sure to reignite a 50-year-old debate over how much, if any, software should be subject to copyright, and the contours of the fair use defense in the digital age.
By Phillip Bantz
Some of China’s largest companies have banded together with major brands in the United States and elsewhere to neutralize “patent trolls,” an indication that the country’s firms are becoming increasingly concerned about patent infringement litigation.
By Anthony H. Cataldo
U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Booking.com Trademark Case