David Swetnam-Burland Speaks to William & Mary Law Students

On February 14, 2019, partner David Swetnam-Burland gave a presentation to the Student Intellectual Property Society at the William & Mary Law School in Williamsburg, Virginia. Swetnam-Burland’s talk, “Bad Patents, Good Law?” addressed his experience defending Brann & Isaacson’s e–commerce clients in patent troll litigation, and discussed recent developments in patent law and litigation from...

Federal Circuit Directs ITC To Consider Revoking Or Modifying Civil Penalty For Infringement of Invalid Patent

In a victory for Brann & Isaacson clients, DBN Holding, Inc. (formerly DeLorme Publishing Co.) and BDN LLC, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has issued an opinion reversing and remanding the International Trade Commission’s decision not to rule on the merits of a petition asking the ITC to set aside a civil penalty order....

J. Crew Wins Summary Affirmance In Patent Dispute With Intellectual Ventures

On November 20, 2017, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals summarily affirmed the invalidity of two patents asserted against J. Crew by Intellectual Ventures without opinion, just two weeks after hearing oral argument from Partner David Swetnam–Burland. In August 2016, Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the Eastern District of Texas granted J. Crew’s motion to dismiss...

TC Heartland Venue Argument Was Not “Available” Before TC Heartland Opinion Issued

In this week’s episode of Patent Venue, when is a change in the law a change in the law? On May 22, 2017, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in TC Heartland, reversing the Federal Circuit and reaffirming that a corporate defendant can only be sued for patent infringement either in its state of residence...

“Place of Business” Means Place of Business, Says Federal Circuit

Previously, on Patent Venue: May 22, 2017: The Supreme Court issues its opinion in TC Heartland, returning to the rule of law that a corporate defendant can only be sued for patent infringement either in its state of residence or a judicial district in which alleged acts of infringement have occurred and the business has...

Oil States Versus The Administrative State

The Supreme Court has now heard from the petitioner in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC. At issue is not only the fate of inter partes review of patents by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, but possibly the ability of administrative agencies to review and retract their own erroneous decisions....

Texas Welcomes TC Heartland

What does the Supreme Court opinion in TC Heartland mean for the business of patent litigation in Texas—particularly the Eastern District of Texas? On first read, TC Heartland seemed to herald the end of the kind of forum–shopping that enabled the Eastern District of Texas to land 40% of all newly filed patent cases. The...

Supreme Court’s Federal Circuit Reversal Streak Continues

The 2016 Term of the Supreme Court has not been kind to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, the specialized appellate court that handles all patent appeals. In each of the six patent cases from the Federal Circuit decided by the Supreme Court, reversal was the result. Specifically, the high court: Reversed the Federal Circuit...

Supreme Court Sharply Limits Patent Forum–Shopping In TC Heartland

Today, May 22, 2017, the Supreme Court struck a powerful blow against forum–shopping in patent litigation and the related patent troll plague. In a concise opinion by Justice Thomas in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, a unanimous Supreme Court held that a domestic corporation “resides” only in its State of incorporation for purpose...

Wall Street Journal Quotes Peter Brann On Impact Of Major Supreme Court Patent Case

In a March 23, 2017, article, the Wall Street Journal quotes Partner Peter Brann on the potential impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in a major patent case, TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands. The case, which is scheduled for oral argument on Monday, March 27, 2017, has the potential to put a stop...