TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC

Editor's Note :

TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC

Academic highlight: The states arguing as amici curiae in the Supreme Court – Dan Schweitzer

Relist Watch – John Elwood

Ask the author: “So Long, Earl” – Andrew Hamm

SCOTUSblog Coverage

SCOTUSblog Coverage

Featured Posts

Sponsored by Casetext

SCOTUStalk see all

Email Digest Sign-Up

Merits Case Pages and Archives

Major Cases

Recent Decisions

Current Relists

Recent Special Features

Live Blog Archives

May 2019

Merits Docket OT18 (May 13, 2019)

Majority Opinions by Author

Merits Cases by Sitting

Voting Breakdown Argued Cases

Majority Lineup 5-4 Decisions

Download our App in the Apple Store

Videos see all

Peabody Award

Sigma Delta Chi

National Press Club Award

Silver Gavel Award

American Gavel Award

Webby Award

Conference of May 16, 2019

Docket No.	Op. Below	Argument	Opinion	Vote	Author	Term
16-341	Fed. Cir.	Mar 27, 2017 Tr.Aud.	May 22, 2017	8-0	Thomas	OT 2016

Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel on an amicus brief by Ericsson Inc., Allergan, Inc., and Traxxas L.P. in support of the respondent in this case.

Holding: The patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), provides that "[a]ny 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." As applied to domestic corporations, “reside[nce]” in Section 1400(b) refers only to the state of incorporation; the amendments to Section 1391 did not modify the meaning of Section 1400(b) as interpreted in Fourco Glass Co. v. Transmirra Products.

Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 8-0, in an opinion by Justice Thomas on May 22, 2017. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Opinion analysis: Justices rein in Federal Circuit’s lax rules on patent venue (Ronald Mann)
Argument analysis: Justices hear horror stories about venue for patent litigation (Ronald Mann)
Argument preview: Justices to consider venue for patent litigation (Ronald Mann)
Justices grant review in four new cases (Amy Howe)
Petition of the day (Kate Howard)

Date	Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
Jul 8 2016	Application (16A45) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from July 28, 2016 to September 12, 2016, submitted to The Chief Justice.
Jul 13 2016	Application (16A45) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until September 12, 2016.
Sep 12 2016	Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 17, 2016)
Sep 27 2016	Brief amici curiae of 32 Internet Companies, Retailers and Associations filed.
Sep 28 2016	Order extending time to file response to petition to and including November 16, 2016.
Oct 3 2016	Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for petitioner.
Oct 5 2016	Brief amicus curiae of Washington Legal Foundation filed.
Oct 12 2016	Brief amici curiae of The Electronic Frontier Foundation, et al. filed.
Oct 14 2016	Brief amici curiae of American Bankers Association, et al. filed.
Oct 17 2016	Brief amicus curiae of Paul R, Michel filed.
Oct 17 2016	Brief amici curiae of Dell Inc., and The Software & Information Industry Association filed.
Oct 17 2016	Brief amici curiae of 56 Professors of Law and Economics filed.
Nov 16 2016	Brief of respondent Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC in opposition filed. (Distributed)
Nov 21 2016	DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 9, 2016.
Nov 21 2016	Reply of petitioner TC Heartland LLC filed. (Distributed)
Dec 2 2016	Letter of December 2, 2016, received from counsel for the petitioner. (Distributed)
Dec 14 2016	Petition GRANTED.
Jan 30 2017	Joint appendix filed. (Public Record)
Jan 30 2017	Brief of petitioner TC Heartland LLC filed.
Jan 31 2017	Motion to file the joint appendix under seal with redacted copies for the public record filed by petitioner TC Heartland LLC.
Feb 3 2017	SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, March 27, 2017
Feb 6 2017	Record requested from the U.S.C.A. for the Federal Circuit.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amicus curiae of General Electric Company in support of neither party filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Realtors filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amici curiae of The Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Public Knowledge filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amici curiae of Texas, et al. filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amicus curiae of American Bar Association filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amicus curiae of Engine Advocacy filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amicus curiae of Software & Information Industry Association filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amicus curiae of BSA l The Software Alliance filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amicus curiae of Washington Legal Foundation filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amici curiae of American Bankers Association, et al. filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amici curiae of Intel Corporation, and Dell Inc. filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amicus curiae of ACT l The App Association filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amici curiae of 61 Professors of Law and Economics filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amicus curiae of Unified Patents Inc. filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amicus curiae of The Generic Pharmaceutical Association filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amicus curiae of American Intellectual Property Law Association in support of neither party filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amici curiae of 48 Internet Companies, Retailers and Associations filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amicus curiae of Orange County Intellectual Property Law Association filed.
Feb 6 2017	Brief amicus curiae of The Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago in support of neither party filed.
Feb 6 2017	Appendix of amicus curiae The Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago in support of neither party filed.
Feb 8 2017	Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of February 24, 2017.
Feb 14 2017	Record received from the U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit. The record is electronic and available on PACER.
Feb 14 2017	Record received from the U.S.D.C. Delaware. The record is electronic and partially SEALED.
Feb 22 2017	CIRCULATED.
Feb 27 2017	Motion to file the joint appendix under seal with redacted copies for the public record GRANTED.
Mar 1 2017	Brief of respondent Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC filed. (Distributed)
Mar 8 2017	Brief amicus curiae of Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) filed. (Distributed)
Mar 8 2017	Brief amici curiae of Ericsson Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)
Mar 8 2017	Brief amici curiae of 22 Law, Economics and Business Professors filed. (Distributed)
Mar 8 2017	Brief amicus curiae of Papool S. Chaudhari filed. (Distributed)
Mar 8 2017	Brief amicus curiae of Genentech, Inc. filed. (Distributed)
Mar 8 2017	Brief amici curiae of Biotechnology Innovation Organization, et al. filed. (Distributed)
Mar 8 2017	Brief amicus curiae of Whirlpool Corp. filed. (Distributed)
Mar 8 2017	Brief amicus curiae of TDE Petroleum Data Solutions, Inc. filed. (Distributed)
Mar 8 2017	Brief amici curiae of Professors of Patent Law and Civil Procedure filed. (Distributed)
Mar 8 2017	Brief amici curiae of 33 Practicing-Entity Patent Owners filed. (Distributed)
Mar 8 2017	Brief amici curiae of Eighteen Individuals and Organizations Representing Inventors and Patent Owners filed. (Distributed)
Mar 20 2017	Reply of petitioner TC Heartland LLC filed. (Distributed)
Mar 27 2017	Argued. For petitioner: James W. Dabney, New York, N. Y. For respondent: William M. Jay, Washington, D. C.
May 22 2017	Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Thomas, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which all other Members joined, except Gorsuch, J., who took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Jun 26 2017	JUDGMENT ISSUED.

Featured Posts

Academic highlight: The states arguing as amici curiae in the Supreme Court – Dan Schweitzer

Relist Watch – John Elwood

Ask the author: “So Long, Earl” – Andrew Hamm
Sponsored by Casetext
SCOTUStalk see all
Email Digest Sign-Up
Receive a daily email digest from Feedburner by entering your email.
Merits Case Pages and Archives

Archives

or

This Week at the Court
The Supreme Court released orders from the May 9 conference on Monday; the justices did not add any new cases to their merits docket for next term.
On Monday, the justices released their opinions in Apple Inc. v. Pepper, Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt and Cochise Consultancy v. United States, ex rel. Hunt.
On Thursday, the justices met for their May 16 conference; John Elwood's Relist Watch compiles the petitions that were relisted for this conference.
Major Cases
- Department of Commerce v. New York
  (1) Whether the district court erred in enjoining the secretary of the Department of Commerce from reinstating a question about citizenship to the 2020 decennial census on the ground that the secretary’s decision violated the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 701 et seq; (2) whether, in an action seeking to set aside agency action under the APA, a district court may order discovery outside the administrative record to probe the mental processes of the agency decisionmaker -- including by compelling the testimony of high-ranking executive branch officials -- without a strong showing that the decisionmaker disbelieved the objective reasons in the administrative record, irreversibly prejudged the issue, or acted on a legally forbidden basis; and (3) whether the secretary’s decision to add a citizenship question to the decennial census violated the enumeration clause of the U.S. Constitution.
- Lamone v. Benisek
  In case in which the plaintiffs allege that a Maryland congressional district was gerrymandered to retaliate against them for their political views: (1) whether the various legal claims articulated by the three-judge district court are unmanageable; (2) whether the three-judge district court erred when, in granting plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, it resolved disputes of material fact as to multiple elements of plaintiffs’ claims, failed to view the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and treated as “undisputed” evidence that is the subject of still-unresolved hearsay and other evidentiary objections; and (3) whether the three-judge district court abused its discretion in entering an injunction despite the plaintiffs’ years-long delay in seeking injunctive relief, rendering the remedy applicable to at most one election before the next decennial census necessitates another redistricting.
- Kisor v. Wilkie
  Whether the Supreme Court should overrule Auer v. Robbins and Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., which direct courts to defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of its own ambiguous regulation.
- Rucho v. Common Cause
  (1) Whether plaintiffs have standing to press their partisan gerrymandering claims; (2) whether plaintiffs’ partisan gerrymandering claims are justiciable; and (3) whether North Carolina’s 2016 congressional map is, in fact, an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander.
- The American Legion v. American Humanist Association
  (1) Whether a 93-year-old memorial to the fallen of World War I is unconstitutional merely because it is shaped like a cross; (2) whether the constitutionality of a passive display incorporating religious symbolism should be assessed under the tests articulated in Lemon v. Kurtzman, Van Orden v. Perry, Town of Greece v. Galloway or some other test; and (3) whether, if the test from Lemon v. Kurtzman applies, the expenditure of funds for the routine upkeep and maintenance of a cross-shaped war memorial, without more, amounts to an excessive entanglement with religion in violation of the First Amendment.
- Gamble v. United States
  Whether the Supreme Court should overrule the “separate sovereigns” exception to the double jeopardy clause.
see all this term’s cases »
Recent Decisions
- Apple Inc. v. Pepper Respondents, who purchased apps for their iPhones though Apple’s App Store, were direct purchasers from Apple under Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois and may sue Apple for allegedly monopolizing the retail market for the sale of iPhone apps.
- Cochise Consultancy Inc. v. United States, ex rel. Hunt The limitations period in 31 U.S.C. §3731(b)(2) -- which provides that a False Claims Act action must be brought within three years after the “the official of the United States charged with responsibility to act in the circumstances” knew or should have known the relevant facts, but not more than 10 years after the violation -- applies in a qui tam suit in which the federal government has declined to intervene; the relator in a nonintervened suit is not “the official of the United States” whose knowledge triggers §3731(b)(2)’s limitations period.
- Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt Nevada v. Hall is overruled; states retain their sovereign immunity from private suits brought in courts of other states.
see all this term’s cases »
Current Relists
- al-Alwi v. Trump (1) Whether the government’s statutory authority to detain Moath Hamza Ahmed al-Alwi has unraveled; (2) whether, alternatively, the government’s statutory authority to detain al-Alwi has expired because the conflict in which he was captured has ended; and (3) whether the Authorization for Use of Military Force authorizes, and the Constitution permits, detention of an individual who was not “engaged in an armed conflict against the United States” in Afghanistan prior to his capture.
- Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky Inc. (1) Whether a state may require health-care facilities to dispose of fetal remains in the same manner as other human remains, i.e., by burial or cremation; and (2) whether a state may prohibit abortions motivated solely by the race, sex or disability of the fetus and require abortion doctors to inform patients of the prohibition.
- Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky Inc. Whether a state, consistent with the 14th Amendment, may require an ultrasound as part of informed consent at least 18 hours before an abortion.
More Petitions »
Recent Special Features
Statistical Snapshot

Cases argued 70

Cases decided 32

Summary reversals 4

Merits cases granted to date 73

see all »
Live Blog Archives
See all
Twitter Feed

Tweets by @SCOTUSblog

Full Calendar Submit Event

Orders/Opinions
Arguments
Conferences

Events
Holidays
Multiple

Merits Docket OT18 (May 13, 2019)
Majority Opinions by Author
Merits Cases by Sitting
Voting Breakdown Argued Cases
Majority Lineup 5-4 Decisions
Download our App in the Apple Store
Videos see all

Justice Thomas at Pepperdine Law School

On March 30, Justice Clarence Thomas spoke with former clerk Brittney Lane Kubisch and Pepperdine University President-elect James Gash at Pepperdine University School of Law. Thomas told the audience that he had no plans to retire from the Supreme Court.

Peabody Award
Awarded the Peabody Award for excellence in electronic media.
Sigma Delta Chi
Awarded the Sigma Delta Chi deadline reporting award for online coverage of the Affordable Care Act decision.
National Press Club Award
Awarded the National Press Club's Breaking News Award for coverage of the Affordable Care Act decision.
Silver Gavel Award
Awarded the Silver Gavel Award by the American Bar Association for fostering the American public’s understanding of the law and the legal system.
American Gavel Award
Awarded the American Gavel Award for Distinguished Reporting About the Judiciary to recognize the highest standards of reporting about courts and the justice system.
Webby Award
Awarded the Webby Award for excellence on the internet.

Cases argued	70
Cases decided	32
Summary reversals	4
Merits cases granted to date	73

9
Conference

13
Orders
Opinions

16
Conference

20
Orders
Opinions

23
Conference

30
Conference