“Forum selling” is jurisdictional competition intended to attract litigants. While consensual forum selling may be beneficial, non-consensual forum selling is harmful because it encourages jurisdictions to adopt an inefficient pro-plaintiff bias. In the last 20 years, the Eastern District of Texas has adopted an aggressive and remarkably successful policy of non-consensual forum selling in patent infringement actions. In 2016, 44% of all patent infringement actions were filed in the Eastern District of Texas, and 93% of them were filed by patent assertion entities or “patent trolls.” In December 2016, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in TC Heartland v. Kraft, to consider the definition of corporate residence for the purpose of patent ve...
28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) provides that a defendant in a patent case may be sued where the defendant is in...
Lack of sanguinity for patent holders was manifest after the Supreme Court’s May 22, 2017, opinion i...
Lack of sanguinity for patent holders was manifest after the Supreme Court’s May 22, 2017, opinion i...
Forum selling” is jurisdictional competition intended to attract litigants. While consensual forum s...
Forum selling” is jurisdictional competition intended to attract litigants. While consensual forum s...
“Forum selling” is jurisdictional competition intended to attract litigants. While consensual forum ...
The Eastern District of Texas has recently become a rocket docket for patent litigation owing to the...
For most of patent law’s 200-plus year history, patent holders could sue only in the district inhabi...
Legal doctrines developed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit are often derided as ...
Legal doctrines developed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit are often derided as ...
The traditional academic explanation for forum shopping is simple: litigants prefer to file cases in...
Prior to the Supreme Court\u27s decision in TC Heartland, the law of venue in patent infringement ac...
The traditional academic explanation for forum shopping is simple: litigants prefer to file cases in...
28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) provides that a defendant in a patent case may be sued where the defendant is in...
28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) provides that a defendant in a patent case may be sued where the defendant is in...
28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) provides that a defendant in a patent case may be sued where the defendant is in...
Lack of sanguinity for patent holders was manifest after the Supreme Court’s May 22, 2017, opinion i...
Lack of sanguinity for patent holders was manifest after the Supreme Court’s May 22, 2017, opinion i...
Forum selling” is jurisdictional competition intended to attract litigants. While consensual forum s...
Forum selling” is jurisdictional competition intended to attract litigants. While consensual forum s...
“Forum selling” is jurisdictional competition intended to attract litigants. While consensual forum ...
The Eastern District of Texas has recently become a rocket docket for patent litigation owing to the...
For most of patent law’s 200-plus year history, patent holders could sue only in the district inhabi...
Legal doctrines developed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit are often derided as ...
Legal doctrines developed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit are often derided as ...
The traditional academic explanation for forum shopping is simple: litigants prefer to file cases in...
Prior to the Supreme Court\u27s decision in TC Heartland, the law of venue in patent infringement ac...
The traditional academic explanation for forum shopping is simple: litigants prefer to file cases in...
28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) provides that a defendant in a patent case may be sued where the defendant is in...
28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) provides that a defendant in a patent case may be sued where the defendant is in...
28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) provides that a defendant in a patent case may be sued where the defendant is in...
Lack of sanguinity for patent holders was manifest after the Supreme Court’s May 22, 2017, opinion i...
Lack of sanguinity for patent holders was manifest after the Supreme Court’s May 22, 2017, opinion i...