If San Francisco Is Not Your Final Destination… – On NatLawReview.com, George Summerfield and Katherine Allor examine the Federal Circuit’s recent patent case addressing personal jurisdiction, Trimble, Inc. v. PerDiemCo LLC.
New Vision Gaming & Development, Inc. v. SG Gaming, Inc. – Kevin E. Noonan reports on this case that we have been tracking, which involved alleged due process violations by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Here is the latest.
If San Francisco Is Not Your Final Destination…
In their article on The National Law Review, Summerfield and Allor explain that, “[i]n Trimble, Inc. v. PerDiemCo LLC, the Federal Circuit seems to have changed course.” Summerfield and Allor report that foundational to the Federal Circuit’s reversal of the district court’s decision on appeal “was the court’s conclusion that Red Wing Shoe ‘did not create a rule’ that ‘patent enforcement letters can never provide the basis for jurisdiction in a declaratory judgment action.’” In light of this case, Summerfield and Allor remark that “patentees must take care in correspondence with potential infringers to avoid inadvertently giving rise to personal jurisdiction in a particular forum.”
New Vision Gaming & Development, Inc. v. SG Gaming, Inc.
In Kevin Noonan’s post on PatentDocs.com, Noonan discusses New Vision Gaming & Development, Inc. v. SG Gaming, Inc. Noonan describes the strategy by the appellant as “daring (and somewhat risky)” when it “asserted a purported conflict of interest by Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) in making institution decisions.” Noonan explains that the Federal Circuit avoided the issue entirely and vacated the decision and remanded the case. Noonan claims that “[i]t is Judge Newman’s dissent that is noteworthy, because Judge Newman believed that the question of whether a contract/license between the parties . . . should have precluded the PTAB from asserting jurisdiction (and as a threshold issue might have precluded remand if the PTAB had improperly done so).”