PerdiemCo, LLC. v. Industrack LLC DC

The Federal Circuit has just created a new jurisdictional pitfall for NPEs seeking to litigate where they choose. On May 12, the appellate court held in Trimble v. PerDiemCo (19-2164) that there is no rule preventing courts from exercising specific personal jurisdiction over patent owners based on the sending of demand letters into the forum at issue. The decision could potentially make some NPEs vulnerable to declaratory judgment actions filed by accused infringers in venues commonly seen as less hospitable to patent owners.

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) continued to see the filing of petitions for inter partes review (IPR) against publicly traded NPEs in March 2017, including Acacia Research Corporation; Finjan Holdings, Inc.; Pendrell Corporation; TiVo Corporation (formerly known as Rovi Corporation); and Wi-LAN Inc. (WiLAN). A variety of prolific, privately held NPEs were also targeted for IPR throughout March, including Blackbird Tech LLC, General Patent Corporation, IP Edge LLC, Realtime Data LLC, and Papst Licensing GmbH & Company Kg, along with several inventors and inventor-controlled NPEs and an assortment of other plaintiffs.

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board saw the filing of petitions against a host of publicly traded NPEs in February, including Acacia Research Corporation, Pendrell Corporation, Wi-LAN Inc. (WiLAN), and Xperi Corporation (f/k/a Tessera Holding Corporation), with challenges also filed in campaigns waged by Intellectual Ventures LLC (IV); IP Bridge, Inc.; Uniloc Corporation Pty. Limited; and Monument Patent Holdings, LLC.