green
Positive treatment
Hot · 263 in 5y
Quoted verbatim 50×
144.9 score
G Cite
cited 21× by 21 distinct cases, 2020–2022 · 4 courts ·
…in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
at p. 1345
⚠ not in text
Topic ↗
cited 3× by 3 distinct cases, 2011–2013 · 2 courts ·
…requiring a defendant to show that a potential witness has more than relevant and material information at this point in the litigation or risk facing denial of transfer on that basis is unnecessary.
at p. 1343
⚠ not in text
cited 3× by 3 distinct cases, 2012–2024 · 3 courts ·
…the witnesses from europe will be required to travel a significant distance no matter where they testify.
at p. 1344
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 2009 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2009
2017
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Optimum Imaging Technologies LLC v. Sony Corporation
because the documents housed in europe and washington, d.c. will need to be transported in any event, it is only slightly more inconvenient or costly to require the transportation of those materials to california than texas
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Universal Connectivity Technologies Inc. v. HP Inc.
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
the witnesses from europe will be required to travel a significant distance no matter where they testify.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Emerging Automotive LLC v. Kia Corporation
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
the petitioners have identified witnesses relevant to , and the identification of those witnesses weighs in favor of transfer.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
In Re HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC.
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evi- dence usually comes from the accused infringer.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
USTA TECHNOLOGY, LLC v. GOOGLE LLC
(5×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see"
the fact that the transferee venue is a venue with usable subpoena power here weighs in favor of transfer, and not only slightly.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
USTA Technology, LLC v. Google LLC
(5×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see"
the fact that the transferee venue is a venue with usable subpoena power here weighs in favor of transfer, and not only slightly.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
In Re GOOGLE LLC
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
we do not disturb the district court's suggestion that it could dispose of the case more quickly than if the case was transferred to the northern district of california.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Diatek Licensing LLC v. Estrella Media, Inc.
he bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Estech Systems IP, LLC v. Mitel Networks, Inc.
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Phoji, Inc. v. Atlassian, Inc.
(3×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see, e.g."
he bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer . . . .
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Lyft, Inc. v. AGIS Software Development LLC
(4×)
also: Cited "see", Cited "see, e.g."
in 25 patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused 26 infringer. consequently, the place where the documents are kept weighs in 27 favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Opticurrent v. Bitfenix Co. Ltd.
(4×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see"
we do not disturb the district court's suggestion that it could dispose of the case more quickly than if the case was transferred to the northern district of california. we note that this factor appears to be the most speculative . . . .
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Ryanair DAC v. Booking Holdings Inc.
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Japan Display Inc. v. Tianma Microelectronics Co. Ltd.
(5×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see", Cited "see, e.g."
a district court should assess the relevance and materiality of the information the witness may provide.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Jenam Tech, LLC v. Google LLC
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
paSafeShare LLC v. Microsoft Corporation
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
SITO Mobile R&D IP v. Hulu, LLC
(3×)
also: Cited "see", Cited "see, e.g."
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Precis Group, LLC v. Tracfone Wireless, Inc.
(4×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see"
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
True Chemical Solutions, LLC v. Performance Chemical Company
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Performance Chemical Company v. True Chemical Solutions, LLC
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Kuster v. Western Digital Technologies, Inc.
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Kuster v. Western Digital Technologies, Inc.
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
In Re APPLE INC.
(3×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see"
we do not disturb the district court's suggestion that it could dis- pose of the case more quickly than if the case was trans- ferred to the northern district of california
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
MasterObjects, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc.
the witnesses from europe will be required to travel a significant distance no matter where they testify.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Ramos-Gomez v. Adducci
the supreme court has long held that 1404(a) requires individualized, case-by-case consideration of convenience and fairness.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Ramos-Gomez v. ADDUCCI
the supreme court has long held that 1404(a) requires individualized, case-by-case consideration of convenience and fairness.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Parus Holdings Inc. v. LG Electronics Inc
(3×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Parus Holdings Inc. v. Apple Inc.
(3×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Hammond Development International, Inc. v. Google, LLC
(3×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Solas OLED Ltd., an Irish corporation v. Apple Inc.
(3×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Apple Inc.
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Cameron International Corporation v. Nitro Fluids L.L.C.
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
DynaEnergetics Europe GmbH v. Hunting Titan, Inc.
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
DynaEnergetics Europe GmbH v. Hunting Titan, Inc.
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Synkloud Technologies, LLC v. Dropbox, Inc.
(3×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Synkloud Technologies, LLC v. Dropbox, Inc.
(3×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Acqis LLC v. EMC Corp.
(5×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see"
requiring a defendant to show that potential witness has more than relevant and material information at this point in the litigation or risk facing denial of transfer on that basis is unnecessary.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
MGT Gaming, Inc. v. WMS Gaming, Inc.
(4×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see"
requiring a defendant to show that a potential witness has more than relevant and material information at this point in the litigation or risk facing denial of transfer on that basis is unnecessary.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Distinctive Development Ltd.
(6×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see"
requiring a defendant to show that a potential witness has more than relevant and material information at this point in the litigation or risk facing denial of transfer on that basis is unnecessary.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
In Re amazon.com Inc.
tjhere is simply no rational argument that, in light of the witnesses, parties, evidence, compulsory attendance and local interest, the clearly more convenient venue is not the northern district of california.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Carroll v. Texas Instruments, Inc.
(4×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
the witnesses from europe will be required to travel a significant distance no matter where they testify.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Optimum Power Solutions LLC v. Apple, Inc.
(4×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see"
requiring a defendant to show that a potential witness has more than relevant and material information at this point in the litigation or risk facing denial of transfer on that basis is unnecessary.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
In Re Zimmer Holdings, Inc.
in patent in 1382 fringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Teleconference Systems v. Proctor & Gamble Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(6×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
because a substantial number of material witnesses reside within the transferee venue and the state of california, and no witnesses reside within the eastern district of texas, the district court clearly erred in not determining this factor to weigh substantially in favor of tran…
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Aten International Co. v. Emine Technology Co.
(4×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see"
several relevant factors weigh in favor of transfer and others are neutral, then the speed of the transferee district court should not alone outweigh all of those other factors.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Apple Inc v. Voip-Pal.com, Inc.
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually 6 comes from the accused infringer.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Voxer, Inc. v. Meta Platforms, Inc.
(3×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Voxer, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc. Do not file in this case. Case Transferred to Austin Division. New case number is 1:20-cv-655-ADA.
(3×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer. consequently, the place where the defendant's documents are kept weighs in favor of transfer to that location.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
IPVenture, Inc. v. Acer, Inc.
(4×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see"
in patent infringement cases, the bulk of the relevant evidence usually comes from the accused infringer.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
In Re Apple, Inc.
(3×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
hen, as here, several relevant factors weigh in favor of transfer and others are neutral, then the speed of the transferee district court should not alone outweigh all of those other factors.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In Re Genentech, Inc.
2009-M901.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Jul 9, 2009.
566 F.3d 1338
Cited by 333 opinions | Published
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit July 9, 2009
ERRATA
Appeal No. 2009-M901
IN RE GENENTECH, INC.
Decided: May 22, 2009 Precedential Order
Please make the following changes: Page 1, line 8-9, please change “The petitioners, companies which are headquartered in San Francisco, California, and San Diego, California, respectively,” to --Genentech, which is headquartered in San Francisco, California, and Biogen, which has facilities in San Diego, California,--. Page 9, lines 21-22, please change “is headquartered in San Diego, California and” to --conducts research and development from its facilities in San Diego, California and at least some of its employees and managers--. Page 10, lines 20-21, please change “corporate headquarters” to --facilities--. Page 15, lines 4-5, please change “are headquartered in the transferee venue or San Diego, California.” to --are either headquartered in the transferee venue or have facilities in San Diego, California.--.