Determining the Best Forum for Pursuing or Defending
Patent Infringement Claims
*** Recent Federal Circuit decisions prompt surge in defense motions to transfer ***

CD/DVD of a 90-minute CLE teleconference with Q&A
Sponsored by the Legal Publishing Group of Strafford Publications
Conducted on August 4, 2009
Now available on CD/DVD
Price: $297

Please note: You will be taken to the Strafford website to complete your order.

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

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

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.

Order Today!
Teleconference on CD includes full event recording plus handouts.

Continuing Legal Education
Continuing Legal Education credits are granted for an additional $65 per person. Please refer to the options on the order page to take advantage of these credits.

Please note: You will be taken to the
Strafford website to complete your order.