United States: E.D. Texas's Loss Should Prove ITC's Gain

The Supreme Court's recent ruling in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, 137 S. Ct. 1514, 122 U.S.P.Q.2d 1553 (2017), has quickly and dramatically reshaped the landscape for personal jurisdiction and venue in U.S. patent cases. As a result, the U.S. International Trade Commission, with its unique jurisdictional requirements, should now become an even busier forum for fast moving patent disputes.

In TC Heartland, the Supreme Court considered where proper venue lies for a patent infringement lawsuit brought against a domestic corporation. Id. at 1514-15. For many years, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has broadly construed the patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), incorporating into its definition the general venue statute's broader statutory definition of corporate residence. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(a), (c); see also VE Holding Corp. v. Johnson Gas Appliance Co., 917 F.2d 1574, 16 U.S.P.Q.2d 1614 (Fed. Cir. 1990). The result has been a gradual widening reach of the patent venue statute to draw corporate defendants into patent suits in jurisdictions favorable to plaintiffs—such as, famously, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas—but to which the defendant corporation often has a tenuous connection. In TC Heartland, the Supreme Court found that the Federal Circuit's broad construction of corporate residency does not square with Congress's mandate in 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), and that corporate "residency" for purposes of the patent venue statute is limited to the state of incorporation. 581 at 1514, citing Fourco Glass Co. v. Transmirra Products Corp., 353 U.S. 222, 226, 113 U.S.P.Q. 234 (1957).

But if TC Heartland sounds the death knell for plaintiff-friendly venues such as the Eastern District of Texas, it also has the potential to balloon the court dockets in states with large numbers of corporate residents, such as Delaware and California. The District of Delaware and the Northern District of California, for example, already see large numbers of patent cases filed each year, and those numbers will likely grow even higher.

For many savvy and well-positioned plaintiffs, however, the alternative will be very clear. The ITC's jurisdiction for investigating patent infringement (and other unfair trade practices) derives not from the patent venue statute, but from the ITC's own governing statute, Section 337 of the Trade Act of 1930, codified at 19 U.S.C. § 1337. Whereas the patent venue statute is directed to determining personal jurisdiction over defendants, Section 337 investigations at the ITC are based upon subject matter jurisdiction, reaching anyone who has imported, sold for importation, or sold after importation, an article that infringes a valid and enforceable U.S. patent, regardless of where that person or corporation resides. 19 U.S.C. § 1337(B).

This is not the first time a high court decision will turn the gaze of patent owners away from district courts and toward the ITC. In 2006, the Supreme Court's decision in eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, LLC, 547 U.S. 388, 78 U.S.P.Q.2d 1577 (2006), raised the bar on plaintiffs seeking injunctive relief in district courts based on patent infringement. Not coincidentally, filings of new complaints in the ITC increased steadily in years following eBay as patent owners sought the equitable relief of exclusion orders available under the ITC's governing statute.

Another recent phenomenon—the extensive use of inter partes review proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office—has also likely contributed to a more recent rise in ITC filings. The ITC, unlike most federal district courts, does not typically stay Section 337 investigations pending the completion of IPR proceedings, even if the same patents and claims are at issue. In district court, the fast-moving IPR proceedings typically outpace the district court's schedule, leading busy district court judges to wait for the results of IPR proceedings before dedicating valuable time to complex patent cases. In contrast, the ITC has cited its statutory mandate to speedily resolve unfair trade issues as the basis for refusing to stay the rapid pace of Section 337 investigations in most situations. As a result, the ITC has become an even more attractive forum for patent owners wishing to keep pressure on potential infringers without having to await the results of IPR proceedings.

The ITC also allows a patentee to assert claims of infringement against a number of respondents in a single investigation. This feature became unique when the America Invents Act limited the joinder rules in district court. After TC Heartland, this feature becomes a distinct advantage because a patentee can pursue multiple infringers in a single ITC investigation, rather than filing district court complaints in several different district courts.

True, the ITC is not for everyone. There are additional threshold factors a patent holder must consider before choosing to file a complaint with the ITC. First, there must be an act of importation tied to the article accused of infringing the U.S. patent. Second, the ITC requires proof of "significant" or "substantial" investments (depending on the type of investment) in a U.S. domestic industry protected by the asserted patents. Third, although an ITC exclusion order is a powerful remedy, the ITC cannot award damages for patent infringement. Fourth, the very speed of an ITC investigation, often going to trial within nine months of filing, can make the ITC an expensive forum in which to file.

The threshold factors above are usually not insuperable barriers. For example, the vast majority of consumer electronics are imported, triggering the ITC's unique jurisdiction. Frequent defendants in the Eastern District of Texas, such as Samsung and Apple, have also appeared many times in the ITC as respondents, because the importation requirement can be easily met when the infringing product involves a global supply chain.

The domestic industry requirement is also not a major hurdle for a well-positioned patent owner with active manufacturing or research activities in the United States. Investments made in the U.S.—particularly those directed to plant, equipment, labor, engineering, and research and development tied to a product protected by the asserted patents—will typically clear the threshold test of demonstrating a domestic industry. Moreover, an increasing number of ITC complainants have chosen to rely on U.S. investments by licensees making licensed products. The Commission has recognized and accepted a complainant's reliance on investments by licensees when the investments are specifically allocated to articles practicing the patent. See, e.g., Certain Electronic Imaging Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-850, Comm'n Op. at 3, 84-96 (April 21, 2014). As a result, many patent owners may have qualifying domestic industry investments.

The ITC is also distinguished from the district courts by the absence of damages. Under its governing statute, the ITC's principal remedy is equitable relief in the form of an exclusion order against products found to infringe a U.S. patent. An ITC exclusion order denies the maker of an infringing product access to the U.S. market, which is particularly valuable when U.S. manufacturing is not commercially feasible. The ITC will often also issue cease-and-desist orders to prevent the continued commerce in infringing products already in the U.S. While powerful as a trade tool, these equitable remedies cannot make a patentee whole for the financial damage infringement may have caused. Seeking ITC relief does not preclude seeking damages, however. Many patent holders file an ITC complaint at the same time as a district court case, to preserve a claim to damages. By statute, at 28 U.S.C. § 1659, a parallel district court case must be stayed upon request of a respondent pending a final decision in the ITC, but it preserves the ability to recover damages at a later date. While some patent owners may miss the potential for large jury verdicts sometimes available in a district court, the days of reliably plaintiff-friendly district courts may be gone with TC Heartland in any event.

Finally, the expense of an ITC case may be intimidating, particularly to small- and mid-sized companies without expansive litigation budgets. By consolidating a multi-year district court patent litigation into a 10-month period, costs can mount quickly, although they are typically less than a patentee might incur over the many years a district court case may drag on. Further, the leverage and attention that may be gained from filing in the ITC, and the expedient remedy that an administrative law judge may recommend within a year, often signal the immediate seriousness of a patent litigation in a way that a home-turf district court case may not for a defendant. While many ITC cases go all the way to trial, many also settle within the 16-month total investigation period, bringing relatively speedy resolution to matters that could otherwise drag on for years in district court.

Conversely, the ITC as an alternative forum to plaintiff-friendly district courts should not leave potential respondents despondent. Several features of ITC procedure, such as adjudication by a patent-savvy administrative law judge rather than a jury, the necessity for the complainant to prove domestic industry allegations in detail, and the participation of attorneys from the ITC's Office of Unfair Import Investigations in most investigations, may be seen as improvements over litigating in remote federal judicial districts with a reputation for patent-holder deference.

The full impact TC Heartland (and its eventual progeny) will have on the patent litigation landscape in the U.S. remains to be seen. But the friendly plains of the ITC may prove fertile ground for patent owners seeking a new and receptive forum outside the reach of the patent venue statute.

Originally published in BNA's Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Events from this Firm
23 Sep 2018, Seminar, Chicago, United States

Finnegan is a sponsor of the Intellectual Property Owners Association Annual Meeting, supporting the Women in IP Networking Brunch.

26 Sep 2018, Webinar, Washington, DC, United States

This latest series of webinars will explore emerging trends in the changing intellectual property (IP) legal environment in Europe and the United States.

26 Sep 2018, Webinar, Washington, DC, United States

This latest series of webinars will explore emerging trends in the changing intellectual property (IP) legal environment in Europe and the United States.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Jones Day
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
Morrison & Foerster LLP
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Jones Day
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
Morrison & Foerster LLP
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions