Judge Payne denied the motion, which was predicated not on the defendant’s not having a regular and established place of business in the district – it admitted that it did – but its argument that “that property is not used for the accused systems.” Even assuming that the argument was correct, the court found sufficient evidence of allegedly infringing activity, and denied the alternative motion to transfer the case to the SDTX.
© 2023 Michael C. Smith. Use limited to individual subscribers. Further distribution prohibited.
This blog does not constitute legal advice. If you’d like to discuss a related legal matter, please contact Michael C. Smith via email or call 903-938-8900.