Application And Enlightenment Of American Venue Statute For Patent Litigation

The United States is the world's leading technology powerhouse and a major patent country.The phenomenon of malicious robbery of patent trolls is prevalent.For a long time,US courts have generally accepted patent infringement cases in accordance with the general venue statute stipulated in Article 18,Section 1 of the United States Code,and used state jurisdiction as the basis for determining the jurisdiction of patent litigation,resulting in patents flowing freely to choose themselves.Favorable jurisdictional courts,patent litigation is highly concentrated in certain patentee-friendly courts.In 2017,the US Supreme Court issued a final judgment on Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC v.TC Heartland LLC patent infringement case,clarifying that for US domestic companies,US Code 28,Section 1400 b is the only confirmation of patent litigation venue In the clause,the patentee can only sue in the place where the defendant's place of residence or the defendant commits the infringement and has a long-term fixed place of business.The judgment clarified the applicable relationship between the two jurisdictional provisions,solved the confusion in the application of the US patent litigation jurisdiction rules,and is expected to curb the phenomenon of patent smuggling.In response to this problem,this paper starts with the TC Heartland case,first introduces the US patent litigation jurisdiction system,and then analyzes the existing cases,sorts out the changes and influences of the US patent litigation jurisdiction system in judicial application,and finally summarizes the appropriate restrictions.The reasonableness of the plaintiff's choice of venue and reasonable suggestions for perfecting the patent litigation jurisdiction system in China.When dealing with the jurisdiction of patent litigation,it is necessary to fully protect the litigant's litigation rights,and also to alert the parties to abuse the right to appeal,to maliciously delay the possibility of litigation,to avoid wasting public judicial resources,and to uphold the principle of proportionality,between fairness and efficiency,cost and relief to find a reasonable balance.