Why does the patent venue statute shield accused infringers from patent litigations in states where they have registered to do business as foreign corporations? Isn’t that part of the quid pro-quo of doing business in the district? The general venue statute does not provide such a shield; so why provide it in patent cases? Maybe the time has come to kill the patent venue statute entirely because without it, patent cases would fall under the general venue statute and be treated like other corporate litigations.
Recent Posts
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, July 26: New Group Registration for Frequently Updated News Websites, Trade Secret Claims Against TikTok Survive Dismissal, and USPTO’s Estoppel Provisions in IPR Proceedings Upheld
- Call Off Chicken Little: The Sky is Not Falling for Skinny Labeling After GSK v. Teva
- CAFC Committee Recommends Another Year of Sanctions Against Newman
- Massie Tells House IP Subcommittee Witnesses He’s ‘Appalled’ By Proposals to Rein in ITC’s Patent Powers
- CAFC Invalidates Remaining Claim on Data Transmission Patent, Remands Substitute Claims for Collateral Estoppel Determination