Ve Holding Corporation v. Johnson Gas Appliance Company

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that changes to the general venue statute meant that, in patent cases, corporations reside in every venue where personal jurisdiction is proper
• noting that “a declaratory judgment action alleging that a patent is invalid and not infringed” is “the mirror image of a suit for patent infringement”
• reading § 1400(b) to incorporate the definition of \resides\ in the 1988 version of 28 U.S.C. § 1391 (c)
• \venue in a patent infringement case includes any district where there would be personal jurisdiction over the corporate defendant at the time the action is commenced\
• “It is axiomatic that statutory interpretation begins with the language of the statute. If . . . the language is clear and fits the case, the plain meaning of the statute will be regarded as conclusive.”
• discussing the role that legislative compromise played

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).