Remote Work and Patent Venue
Patent – Patently-O 2022-09-30
Summary:
by Dennis Crouch
In re Monolithic Power Systems, Inc., — F.4th — (Fed. Cir. 2022)
In a 2-1 decision, the Federal Circuit has denied Monolithic’s petition for writ of mandamus seeking to escape from Judge Albright W.D. Tex. courtroom for improper venue. Since MPS is a Delaware Corp., the only way venue is proper in W.D. Tex. is if it “has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business.” 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). The company has employees, and various sales-channels within the district, but argues that it lacks a “regular and established place of business.” As an alternative to its improper venue argument, MPS also argued that venue is inconvenient under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) and that the case should instead be transferred to N.D. Cal.
Judge Albright denied the motions to dismiss/transfer — holding that the “regular and established place of business” prong of the 1400(b) test was satisfied by three key findings:
- MPS employed local engineers and sales managers in WDTX to serve local customers;
- MPS stored property in WDTX (in the homes of its employees) and that equipment was used to service MPS’s WDTX customers, and
- MPS continually maintain a physical presence within WDTX, including by advertising for replacement employees should any of MPS’s existing WDTX employees leave the company or move to a new location.
Continue reading Remote Work and Patent Venue at Patently-O.