Exclusive Licensor Subject To Personal Jurisdiction
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.14.06
In Breckenridge Pharmaceuticals v. Metabolite Labs. (No. 05-1121, -1428; April 7, 2006), a Federal Circuit panel reverses a trial court's holding that it lacked personal jurisdiction over a non-resident patent holder/ licensor who was sued along with its exclusive licensee in a declaratory judgment action. The Federal Circuit also determines there are genuine disputes of material fact and vacates the trial court's summary judgment in favor of the exclusive licensee. Summarizing its own cases, the Federal Circuit explains that personal jurisdiction over a nonresident licensor is proper where a license agreement contemplates “a relationship beyond royalty or cross-licensing payment, such as granting both parties the right to litigate infringement cases or granting the licensor the right to exercise control over the licensee's sales or marketing activities.”
Because the non-patent issues in the case are intimately linked with the patent issues, the panel determines the personal jurisdiction law of the Federal Circuit, not regional circuit law, applies. In this case, the exclusive license granted the licensee the right to sue for patent infringement. Working with that exclusive licensee, the patent owner also sent letters to Florida businesses informing them of the patents. The panel holds these activities, coupled with the licensee's business in the state, adequate to provide the district court there with personal jurisdiction over the patent owner.
Insights
Client Alert | 6 min read | 02.24.26
Artificial Intelligence and Human Resources in the EU: a 2026 Legal Overview
The year 2026 marks a major regulatory turning point for European companies using or considering the use of artificial intelligence in their human resources (HR) processes. The Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 on artificial intelligence (the AI Act) is entering a critical implementation phase, while the European Commission's "Digital Omnibus" package will clarify several obligations and modify certain deadlines.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 02.24.26
DOJ v. OhioHealth Confirms Antitrust Enforcers’ Continued Focus on Health Care Markets
Client Alert | 4 min read | 02.24.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 02.24.26
State-Level Merger Control Grows: California Joins “Mini-HSR” Trend with Senate Bill 25
