Fourco Glass Co. v. Transmirra Products Corp.
353 U.S. 222 (1957)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Fourco Glass Co. v. Transmirra Products Corp., 353 U.S. 222 (1957)

Fourco Glass Co. v. Transmirra Products Corp.

No. 310

Argued April 2, 1957

Decided April 29, 1957

353 U.S. 222

Syllabus

1. Venue in patent infringement actions is governed exclusively by 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), which provides that any such action may be brought

"in the judicial district where the defendant resides, or where the defendant has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business;"

and 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c) has no application to such actions. Stonite Products Co. v. Melvin Lloyd Co.,315 U. S. 561. Pp. 353 U. S. 222-229.

2. A patent infringement action may not be brought against a corporation in a judicial district in which it is not shown to have committed any of the alleged acts of infringement and which is outside the State where it was incorporated, though it has a regularly established place of business in such judicial district. Pp. 353 U. S. 222-229.

3. The 1948 revision and recodification of the Judicial Code, 62 Stat. 869, made no substantive change in § 48 of the Judicial Code when it recodified it as 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). Pp. 353 U. S. 225-228.

233 F.2d 885 reversed and remanded.

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.