Venue in Patent Litigation: New Strategies After Genentech and TS Tech USA
Determining the Best Forum for Pursuing or Defending Patent Infringement Claims
Recording of a 90-minute CLE teleconference with Q&A
Conducted on Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Recorded event now available
This seminar will examine the latest case law developments on patent venue, discuss the evolving venue standards in patent litigation, and offer strategies for pursuing and defending motions to transfer venue.
Description
In recent years, defense motions to transfer venue in patent infringement cases from the Eastern District of Texas to other districts have surged. Two recent Federal Circuit decisions — In re Genentech and In re TS Tech USA Corp. — may prompt additional requests.
Plaintiffs’ counsel have responded to the upswing in motions to transfer by selecting more geographically diverse defendants, suing smaller Texas companies as co-defendants of larger defendants, and splitting cases to provide for multiple cases in a single jurisdiction.
Venue plays a critical role in the outcome of patent litigation. In every patent litigation case, plaintiff and defense counsel must take a fresh look at what forum is perceived to be most favorable to their client and whether a transfer of venue is possible in light of the new case law.
Listen as a panel of patent litigators explains the latest court decisions on patent venue, discusses the developing venue standards in patent litigation, and outlines best practices for pursuing and defending motions to transfer venue.
Outline
- New case law and its aftermath
- 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)
- In re Genentech Inc. (Fed. Cir. May 22, 2009)
- In re TS Tech USA Corp. (Fed. Cir. Dec. 29, 2008)
- Venue issues and declaratory judgments
- Factors impacting selection of venue
- Perceived biases for or against a particular party or class of parties
- Speed to disposition
- Winning percentages for parties
- Percentage of transfers out
- Local patent rules in a particular district
- Court’s experience in handling patent cases
- Likelihood of summary judgment being granted
- Best practices for pursuing and defending motions to transfer venue
- Plaintiffs’ strategies
- Defense strategies
- Patent reform and venue
Benefits
The panel will review these and other key questions:
- What factors should plaintiff and defense counsel consider in selecting a venue for a patent infringement action — whether by original selection of venue or motion to transfer venue?
- How will the recent decisions in In re Genentech and In re TS Tech USA Corp. impact where plaintiffs file cases and whether defendants request a transfer of venue?
- What strategies have been effective for patent litigators when pursuing or defending motions to transfer venue?
Faculty
David A. Segal,
Partner
Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, Irvine, Calif.
He has substantial litigation and transactional experience in patent matters, and has worked extensively on several jury trial matters. He has prosecuted and defended patent infringement actions involving products and methods covering paving, medical devices, cable, Internet and voice over IP, computers and computer software and golfing products.
Anthony J. Fitzpatrick,
Partner
Duane Morris, Boston
He co-chairs the firm's Intellectual Property Litigation Practice. He has litigated matters involving diverse technologies, including factory controls and automation, semiconductors, and water purification, and has gained particular experience in biotechnology, medical devices and other life sciences. He has extensive trial experience and has been lead trial counsel in a number of patent cases.
Ian N. Feinberg,
Partner
Mayer Brown, Palo Alto, Calif.
His practice emphasizes intellectual property, technology litigation and antitrust. He has extensive experience handling trials and binding arbitrations, as well as in trial preparation and counseling (including litigation avoidance) regarding patent, copyright, trade secret, trademark, licensing, unfair competition, and antitrust matters, particularly in the software and semiconductor industries.
Ordering
Online CLE - Audio Recording
Includes audio streaming of full program plus handouts (available 24 hours after live seminar).
CLE:
Pre-approved for participatory or non-traditional/alternate format credit in: CA, HI*, NY*, WV*.
Pre-approved for self-study credit in: AK, AZ, MO, MT, TX, VT, WA.
Upon request, also available in: CO, CT*, FL, GA, ID, KY, LA*, ME, NC, ND, NE, NH, NM, NV, OR*, SC, TN, UT, WI*, WY. If you are applying for credit in one of these states, make sure to select those states when placing your order.
(*Indicates that Strafford must report attendance.)
Online CLE Audio $149.00
Available 24 hours after the live event
Recorded Event
Includes full event recording plus handouts (available after live seminar).
CLE: Pre-approved for self-study credit in: AK, AZ, CA, CT, HI, MO, MT, NY, TX, VT, WA, WV. Upon request, self-study credit is also available in: CO, FL, GA, ID, KY, ME, ND, NE, NH, NM, NV, OR, UT, WI, WY. If you are applying for self-study credit in one of these states, contact Strafford CLE at 1-800-926-7926 ext. 35 or CLE@straffordpub.com.
MP3 Download (Audio Only) $49.00
Available 24 hours after the live event
CD $49.00
plus $9.45 S&H
Available ten business days after the live event
CLE Credit
Strafford's live seminars qualify for CLE in every state that accredits webinars. They offer you a high quality, cost effective, and convenient CLE option, with no lost travel time or expenses.
Customer Reviews
This was an excellent teleconference; one of the best I have listened to. The speakers were all very knowledgeable on the subject, but importantly, they were able to present in a very direct, easy to listen to and understand style.
Jose E Guzman, Jr.
Nossaman
One of the best CLEs outside my firm that I have attended in a long time. The materials and the dual perspectives were great and the comments on one another's presentations were very instructive.
Lisa Taylor Hudson
Sands Anderson Marks & Miller
The information was relevant and well presented. The questions were good, and the speakers responded with clear knowledge.
Sheila Fox Morrison
Davis Wright Tremaine
I found the content very useful and was impressed by the high quality of each speaker's ability to articulate his presentation.
Andrew Lillie
Hogan & Hartson
All the speakers seemed extremely knowledgeable on the subject matter. Overall a very good seminar.
Stephan R. Silen
American AgCredit
Intellectual Property Law Advisory Board
Shareholder
Winthrop & Weinstine
Partner
Fulbright & Jaworski
Partner
Winston & Strawn
Partner
Antonelli Terry Stout & Kraus
Partner
Stroock & Stroock & Lavan
Partner
Mayer Brown
Partner
Duane Morris
Partner
Reed Smith
Partner
Gibson Dunn & Crutcher
Partner
Holland + Knight
Partner
McDermott Will & Emery
Partner
Orrick
Our Guarantee
Strafford webinars and teleconferences are backed by our 100% Unconditional Money-Back Guarantee: if you are not satisfied with any of our products, simply let us know and get a full refund. For more information regarding complaints and refunds, please contact us at 1-800-926-7926 ext 10.