Venue in Patent Litigation: New Strategies After Genentech and TS Tech USA

Determining the Best Forum for Pursuing or Defending Patent Infringement Claims

Recent Federal Circuit decisions prompt surge in defense motions to transfer

Recording of a 90-minute premium CLE webinar with Q&A

This program is included with the Strafford CLE Pass. Click for more information.
This program is included with the Strafford All-Access Pass. Click for more information.

Conducted on Tuesday, August 4, 2009

Course Materials

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.


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.



  1. New case law and its aftermath
    1. 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)
    2. In re Genentech Inc. (Fed. Cir. May 22, 2009)
    3. In re TS Tech USA Corp. (Fed. Cir. Dec. 29, 2008)
    4. Venue issues and declaratory judgments
  2. Factors impacting selection of venue
    1. Perceived biases for or against a particular party or class of parties
    2. Speed to disposition
    3. Winning percentages for parties
    4. Percentage of transfers out
    5. Local patent rules in a particular district
    6. Court’s experience in handling patent cases
    7. Likelihood of summary judgment being granted
  3. Best practices for pursuing and defending motions to transfer venue
    1. Plaintiffs’ strategies
    2. Defense strategies
  4. Patent reform and venue


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?


David A. Segal
David A. Segal

Gibson Dunn & Crutcher

He has substantial litigation and transactional experience in patent matters, and has worked extensively on several...  |  Read More

Anthony J. Fitzpatrick
Anthony J. Fitzpatrick

Duane Morris

He co-chairs the firm's Intellectual Property Litigation Practice. He has litigated matters involving diverse...  |  Read More

Ian N. Feinberg
Ian N. Feinberg
Mayer Brown

His practice emphasizes intellectual property, technology litigation and antitrust. He has extensive experience...  |  Read More

Access Anytime, Anywhere

Strafford will process CLE credit for one person on each recording. All formats include course handouts.

To find out which recorded format will provide the best CLE option, select your state:

CLE On-Demand Audio