The legal question in the case was whether the Federal Circuit had correctly interpreted part of a 1948 statute<br />that requires patent suits to be filed “in the judicial district where the defendant resides.”<br />Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the court, said the Federal Circuit had misconstrued the law<br />and ignored a 1957 Supreme Court precedent that had set out the correct interpretation.<br />TC Heartland sought to move the case to Indiana, but lower courts refused, relying on a 1990 decision of the<br />United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, a specialized court that handles patent appeals.<br />Supreme Court Ruling Could Hinder ‘Patent Trolls’ -<br />By ADAM LIPTAKMAY 22, 2017<br />WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday placed tight limits on where patent lawsuits may be filed — a unanimous decision<br />that was a blow to so-called patent trolls, or companies that buy patents not to use them but to demand royalties and sue for damages.<br />That decision said defendants in patent cases, as in other cases, may be sued essentially anywhere they do business.<br />Such companies have often sued in remote federal courts that have a reputation for friendliness to plaintiffs.<br />Other companies have argued that it makes sense to let cases be considered by courts that have developed expertise in patent matters.
