In re Google LLC

 
APPEAL NO.
20-144
OP. BELOW
DCT
SUBJECT
Patent
AUTHOR
Reyna

Issue(s) Presented

  1. Whether a “third party’s facility qualif[ies] as a ‘regular and established place of business’ of Google within the Eastern District” based on “Google’s arms-length contract with a third-party service provider under which that company refurbishes Google devices at the provider’s own facility in the district.”
  2. Whether this Court should “stay all district-court proceedings while it considers this petition and stay all non-venue-related matters while the district court reconsiders Google’s motion under the proper standards.”

Holding

“Google raises viable arguments based on the law of agency and this court’s precedent, and we are concerned that the district court did not move more quickly to resolve Google’s motion. Nonetheless, we are not satisfied that, based on the record before us, Google’s right to a writ is clear and indisputable. . . . The petition for a writ of mandamus is denied and the motion to stay proceedings is denied as moot.”

Posts About this Case