CAFC OKs Transfer Despite Forum Selection Clause
In a non-precedential opinion issued October 18, 2013, the Federal Circuit issued a decision that calls into question the overall utility of forum selection clauses in contractual relationships. In fact, Eli Lilly lost its bid to have its dispute with Genentech and City of Hope heard in the Northern District of California despite a forum selection clause in the governing contract that stated the parties would litigate any dispute in the Northern District of California. See In re Eli Lilly and Co.
Eli Lilly petitioned for a writ of mandamus directing the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to vacate its order transferring this case to the United States District Court for the Central District of California. In its order granting Genentech’s motion to transfer, the district court noted that the trial judge in the Central District of California had presided over four cases involving the same family of patents at issue. The district court further noted that another trial judge in the Northern District of California had recently transferred a case brought by one of Eli Lilly’s business partners that involves the same patent and product to the Central District of California, citing the expertise the trial judge had gained through these prior lawsuits.
Selecting Forum And Venue For Your Patent Litigation
Trevor Carter, Partner at Baker & Daniels and Practice Center Contributor, and Dorothy R. Auth, Ph.D., Partner at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, sent in this article reviewing the legal homework of determining jurisdiction and proper venue, and discussing considerations parties must make to select the proper forum and how to keep their patent case there through resolution. Trevor Carter will be speaking at PLI’s 5th Annual Patent Law Institute in San Francisco on Monday, March 21st. Here is an excerpt from the article….
Venue
Chapter 87 of the Judicial Code addresses venue for various types of civil actions. There are general venue provisions[1] and special venue provisions.
Venue Statutes – Patent cases: 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b)
Venue for patent infringement cases and copyright cases is addressed under a special venue statute, 28 U.S.C. §1400. In particular, the venue statute for patent cases is §1400(b), which reads:
Any civil action for patent infringement may be brought in the judicial district where the defendant resides, or where the defendant has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business. § 1400(b). (more…)
03.17.11 | Patent Litigation, posts | Stefanie Levine
No Comments
11.6.13 | CAFC, Patent Issues, Patent Litigation | Gene Quinn