The Supreme Court held in TC Heartland that the patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), which governs where infringement suits may be brought, is narrower than the general venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1391. This limits the forums available for infringement claims against a U.S. corporate defendant to its state of incorporation or where it committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business. In this practical webinar, you will learn about how courts have construed this standard in the wake of this decision.
Upon course completion, you will be able to:
- Determine the differences between the patent venue statute and the general venue statute, and why the Supreme Court held the former is narrower than the latter.
- Identify appropriate venues for claims of patent infringement.
- Address issues related to the timing and burden of proof for demonstrating proper venue in a patent case.
- Analyze facts to support or refute allegations that a U.S. corporate defendant has a regular and established place of business in a particular forum.
- Presence of employees or other assets
- Relationships with distributors or other entities
- Selling products or providing services
- Analyze facts to support or refute allegations that a defendant committed acts of infringement in a particular forum.
- Direct versus indirect infringement
- ANDA submissions
- Recognize circumstances where a defendant has waived its ability to object based on improper venue in a patent case.
- Identify parties and claims not subject to the patent venue statute.