Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/16pdf/16-341_8n59.pdf
Page Number: 4

Cite as:  581 U. S. ____ (2017) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
preliminary  print  of  the  United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-
ington,  D. C.  20543,  of  any  typographical  or  other  formal  errors,  in  order
that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 16–341 
_________________ 

TC HEARTLAND LLC, PETITIONER v. KRAFT
 
FOODS GROUP BRANDS LLC
 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 

APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
 

[May 22, 2017] 

JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the Court. 
The  question  presented  in  this  case  is  where  proper
venue  lies  for  a  patent  infringement  lawsuit  brought 
against a domestic corporation.  The patent venue statute,
28  U. S. C.  §1400(b),  provides  that  “[a]ny  civil  action  for 
patent infringement 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.”    In  Fourco  Glass  Co.  v. 
Transmirra Products Corp., 353 U. S. 222, 226 (1957), this
Court  concluded  that  for  purposes  of  §1400(b)  a  domestic 
corporation “resides” only in its State of incorporation. 

In  reaching  that  conclusion,  the  Court  rejected  the
argument  that  §1400(b)  incorporates  the  broader  defini-
tion  of  corporate  “residence”  contained  in  the  general
venue  statute,  28  U. S. C.  §1391(c).    353  U. S.,  at  228. 
Congress  has  not  amended  §1400(b)  since  this  Court
construed  it  in  Fourco,  but  it  has  amended  §1391  twice. 
Section  1391  now  provides  that,  “[e]xcept  as  otherwise 
provided by law” and “[f]or all venue purposes,” a corpora-
tion  “shall  be  deemed  to  reside,  if  a  defendant,  in  any