Supreme Court in 'Heartland v. Kraft' Limits Patent Lawsuit Venues

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands in favor of placing limits on eligible court venues for patent infringement lawsuits. Heartland Food Products Group asked the top court to review 28 U.S. Code Section 1400(b), which requires a plaintiff to bring a patent infringement suit only in a U.S. District court where the defendant resides or has an “established place of business.” The tech sector took a substantial interest because of the case's potential to restrict movement of patent cases to Texas' Marshall and Tyler-based district court and others perceived as friendly to plaintiffs (see 1701170066 and 1703270053). The Supreme Court said patent lawsuits can be brought only in the district court in which the defendant is incorporated. The 8-0 ruling, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, reverses the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s 1990 precedent in VE Holding Corp v. Johnson Gas Appliance that a patent infringement suit could be brought in any jurisdiction where a party conducted business. “While we are disappointed in the Supreme Court's ruling on this procedural matter, we respect the Court's opinion and do not believe it has any impact on the ultimate outcome of our case,” Kraft said in a statement. Heartland didn’t immediately comment. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., hailed the ruling as a decision “to restore reasonable limits on where patent lawsuits can be brought.” He said in February he would re-evaluate what language to include in future patent law revamp legislation based on the Supreme Court’s then-forthcoming Heartland decision (see 1702010069). Goodlatte said now he will continue exploring “other aspects of abusive patent litigation and how we keep our patent laws up to date to ensure a well-functioning patent system.” Congress still “needs to step in with comprehensive patent reform,” Computer & Communications Industry Association President Ed Black said. “While today’s ruling removes one tool used to manipulate the system, there are still others enabling the abuse of the patent system. It’s an area ripe for bipartisan cooperation as Congress looks for low cost and no cost ways to grow jobs and the economy.”