This webinar gathers three savvy patent litigators with deep knowledge of both the Eastern District of Texas and nationwide patent practice and law to consider the implications of the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Heartland. Broadly speaking, the uncertainties surrounding patent litigation venue can now be divided into two categories: first, what happens to pending cases; and, second, where can new patent litigation be filed. The panelists will consider, taking into account the latest developments:
- Pending cases: the options, as defined by timing, waivers, judges’ discretion, the declaratory judgment option for defendants in new venues, whether plaintiffs should file in a new proper venue, etc., mandamus petitions to the Federal Circuit and the appellate court’s likely solutions;
- New cases: the renewed emphasis on the second prong of Section 1400 — “where the defendant has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business” — now that the first prong (where the defendant “resides”) is limited by Heartland to the defendant’s place of incorporation. This will include a review of the frequent legal fights over venue that took place in the decades between the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Fourco (1957) and the Federal Circuit’s now-discredited liberalization of venue in VE Holding (1990).
Speakers:
- Kenneth Adamo, Kirkland & Ellis LLP
- Brett Johnson, Winston & Strawn LLP
- Bill Sigler, Fisch Sigler LLP
