Kinetic Instruments, Inc. v. Lares

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding jurisdiction under the “fraud” prong of the piercing doctrine on the basis of the plaintiffs allegations, despite the defendant’s affidavit denying the alleged fraud
• having a regular and established place of business involves more than “doing business” in forum district
• “It is appropriate to pierce the corporate veil in order to establish venue under the patent venue statutes.”
• “It is appropriate to pierce the corporate veil in order to establish venue under the patent venue statutes.”
• “It is appropriate to pierce the corporate veil in order to establish venue under the patent venue statutes.”
• “To hold a corporate officer personally liable for direct infringement under § 271(a), there must be evidence to justify piercing the corporate veil.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).