Google patent suit transferred from Texas to California

A Texas judge has transferred a patent infringement claim against Google to a California court after the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted a writ of mandamus.

In November 2015, internet technology company Eolas Technologies filed a claim against Google in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, accusing Google of infringing US patent number 9,195,507.

The parties had litigated over similar technology before, with Eolas filing several suits against Google in the Eastern District of Texas over patents related to the ‘507 patent.

On the same day it filed its claim against Google, Eolas also initiated two related lawsuits in the Texas district court—accusing Walmart and Amazon entities of infringement.

Walmart and Amazon sought to transfer the cases against them to the US District Court for the Northern District of California for convenience.

“Although the parties filed all three motions within a week of one another, the district court denied Walmart’s motion more than one month before deciding Google’s and Amazon’s several weeks after,” said the Federal Circuit.

In Google’s case, the district court had concluded that, in weighing the relevant transfer factors, the Northern District of California was not clearly a more convenient forum.

A writ of mandamus is available in “extraordinary situations to correct a clear abuse of discretion or usurpation of judicial power”.

The Federal Circuit, in a Thursday, February 23 judgment, explained that it may grant mandamus relief to correct a “patently erroneous denial of transfer”.

In a split decision, the Federal Circuit held that, by denying Google’s motion, the district court committed “clear error for several reasons”.

“First, when balancing the relevant transfer considerations, the district court erred by resolving the other practical considerations factor in Eolas’s favour. Second, the court did not properly consider the locus of Google’s personnel, operations, and evidence in the Northern District of California.”

The Federal Circuit concluded that it was a “clear abuse of discretion” for the Texas district court to conclude that the Northern District of California is not “clearly the more convenient forum”.

On Friday, February 24, Judge Robert Schroeder transferred the case to the Northern District of California.

It comes after the attorney general of Texas urged the US Supreme Court to end the Eastern District of Texas’ hold on patent litigation.

Ken Paxton filed an amicus brief at the Supreme Court on February 6 in the TC Heartland v Kraft Foods case.

Paxton’s brief asked the Supreme Court to reverse rulings by the Federal Circuit which have “allowed forum-shopping by patent holders who are seeking to influence the outcome of their cases with their venue choices".

Did you enjoy reading this story?  Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories like this sent straight to your inbox.