by Dennis Crouch
In re Apple Inc., No. 24-111 (Fed. Cir. 2024)
Federal Circuit has denied Apple's petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to transfer a patent infringement case from the Western District of Texas to the Northern District of California. The case, Carbyne Biometrics, LLC v. Apple Inc., involves six patents related to authentication and fraud reduction technologies used in Apple devices. U.S. Patent Nos. 10,929,512; 11,475,105; 11,514,138; 9,972,010; 10,713,656; 11,526,886.
Back in May 2023, Carbyne filed the lawsuit in W.D. Tex. Austin division and the case was assigned to Judge Yeakel who promptly retired a few weeks later. Unlike the cases filed in Waco, Carbyne's Austin filing was clearly not a case of judge shopping, but is probably explained as forum shopping. Apple's HQ is N.D. Cal, and Carbyne appears to be NYC based -- neither forum is seen as patentee friendly. Austin is a good choice here because Apple has a billion dollar facility in the city where it manufactures some of the accused devices.
After some shuffling, the case was reassigned to Judge Alan Albright. Although Albright is in the Waco division, he loves patent cases; has extra bandwidth because patent cases have been diverted from his Waco courthouse; and he's willing to hear cases in Austin.
Once it became clear that Judge Albright would be in charge, Apple quickly filed a motion to transfer venue under Section 1404(a) -- arguing that the venue was inconvenient despite the fact that Austin is the company's second-home. The opposite of Judge Shopping, I might Apple's approach here "Judge Dodging."
