"The following month, though, it looked like Cray had been thrown a lifeline by the US Supreme Court, which voted 8-0 to tighten up patent venue rules in a case called TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods. The high court held that companies can only be sued for patent infringement in the state in which they are incorporated, or where the defendant company has a "regular and established place of business."
Yet under the new rules, Gilstrap still wouldn't let Cray out of the district. Cray's only tie to the district was a single salesperson, who worked out of his home in the Eastern District. In the judge's view, though, that was enough to find that Cray had "regular and established" business in the Eastern District and would have to face trial.
Gilstrap's controversial interpretation of the TC Heartland decision has been scorned by lawmakers who have supported patent reform efforts. In a hearing about the US patent system last week, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said Gilstrap's move "rejects the Supreme Court's unanimous decision" and was "reprehensible.""
No comments:
Post a Comment