There are "three general requirements relevant to the inquiry: (1) there must be a physical place in the district (2) it must be a regular and established place of business and (3) it must be the place of the defendant." In re Cray Inc. The Federal Circuit determined the three requirements for showing when a company has a regular and established business presence within a District in In re Cray Inc. However, the question of whether Apple has a "regular or established business" within the Eastern District of Texas is a separate prong of analysis when determining venue under 28 U.S.C. TC Heartland shows that Apple does not reside within the Eastern District of Texas. It was not about the "regular and established business" within a District. TC Heartland was about where a corporation resides for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. So it would be easy for judges to convince themselves that work that's bringing business to town is also good for the country.Įxpect arguments that “regular and established” apply to Apple’s Internet Store’s business and deliveries into the district, and thus terminating a physical presence does not erase regular and established by a long shot. Local businesses started to rely on the revenue from out-of-town visitors. Something broadly similar happened with the Federal Circuit, the nation's patent appeals court.
Once a critical mass of patent lawyers set up shop in the district, I would imagine some of them became friends with the judges and gave them positive feedback on their pro-patent jurisprudence. The more patent-friendly they become, the more patent cases they attract and the more they get to think of themselves as an important center for patent issues. Some expressed shock at the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision and were still digesting what it meant this week. Several attorneys in town switched their area of focus to the town’s new cottage industry: patent litigation. By the early to mid-2000s, word got out that Marshall had a “rocket docket” and even more patent cases came to town.
John Ward - had also adopted rules and timetables that kept cases moving. The district judge in Marshall - then Judge T. In Marshall, there were few criminal cases that cut the line and slowed the patent docket. In Dallas, Texas Instruments had been waiting for years for its day in court. And so Apple has apparently decided it's worth asking the company's North Dallas customers to drive a little farther to get their iPhones repaired. Luckily for Apple, these stores are pretty close to the border of the Eastern District. So under the new rules, continuing to operate the stores makes it easier for patent plaintiffs to sue Apple in the Eastern District. And, of course, a company of Apple's size has business ties to every part of the country.īut under the Supreme Court's 2017 TC Heartland decision, a defendant can only be sued in a district where it "resides"-meaning where it was incorporated-or "has a regular and established place of business."Īpple's two stores in the Eastern District would likely count as "regular and established places of business" for patent-law purposes. Prior to 2017, the law allowed a plaintiff based in the Eastern District of Texas to sue defendants there if defendants had even tenuous connections to the district. The Eastern District is known for its extremely patent-friendly judges, and so for decades patent plaintiffs have set up shop there and sued defendants located all over the country. The move follows a landmark 2017 Supreme Court ruling that tightened up rules against forum shopping in patent cases.
0 kommentar(er)
