Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. Supreme Court limits where patent-infringement cases can be filed
MacDailyNews ^ | Monday, May 22, 2017 4:51PM

Posted on 05/22/2017 5:40:43 PM PDT by Swordmaker

U.S. Supreme Court limits where patent-infringement cases can be filed; decision could limit venue-shopping

“The Supreme Court on Monday limited the ability of patent holders to bring infringement lawsuits in courts that have plaintiff friendly reputations, a notable decision that could provide a boost to companies that defend against patent claims,” Brent Kendall reports for The Wall Street Journal.

“The high court, in an opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas, ruled unanimously that a lower court has been following an incorrect legal standard for almost 30 years that made it possible for patent holders to sue companies in almost any U.S. jurisdiction,” Kendall reports. “Instead, the Supreme Court said, claims of patent infringement must be brought in the state where a corporate defendant is incorporated.”

Kendall reports, “The ruling could significantly shift patent-infringement lawsuits out of some federal districts, including in east Texas, that have been home to large numbers of patent cases because patent holders believed those courts provided a favorable venue for their claims.”


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Computers/Internet
KEYWORDS: applepinglist; infringement; lawsuits; patent; patentinfringement; patents; rocketdocket; scotus; supremecourt; venueshopping
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-22 last
To: Edward.Fish

Yes I don’t see that language as prohibiting the holder from using those rights. Are you saying that the patent holder must make the object in order to sell the object?


21 posted on 05/30/2017 7:42:01 PM PDT by FreedomNotSafety
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: FreedomNotSafety
Yes I don’t see that language as prohibiting the holder from using those rights.

I'm not saying that the language prohibits the holder from doing anything. (In fact, I affirm that the Congress has the power to secure those exclusive rights to the legitimate holder of a patent or copyright.)

Are you saying that the patent holder must make the object in order to sell the object?

No; not at all — What I am saying is that the only legitimate holder of a patent is the inventor.
(A patent held by any entity not the inventor is [strictly speaking] unenforceable legally because Congress lacks the power to enact laws securing those rights [the patent] to persons who are not the inventor.)

22 posted on 05/31/2017 6:58:54 AM PDT by Edward.Fish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-22 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson