Part 1 of this series identified two reasons for the large number of Federal Circuit opinions granting mandamuses reversing Western District of Texas Judge Alan D Albright’s rulings denying patent defendant motions to transfer venue. First, the article referenced the Federal Circuit’s well-documented tendency to add requirements to statutes. Second, it referenced the panel-specific nature of many Federal Circuit decisions, pinpointing that while 13 judges were eligible to sit on the mandamus panels, only four have overwhelmingly granted the petitions. But those four judges—along with Judge Taranto—sit on a disproportionate number of panels, and have designated for publication several of the opinions in their cases.

This article will examine this second aspect of the 2020 – 2021 opinions in more detail, including reasons why more petitions for mandamus review of venue decisions make their way to certain judges, and especially those filed by certain types of defendants.

The Uneven Distribution of Venue Mandamus Decisions at the Federal Circuit

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]