Case Name: IN RE: CARBONITE, INC., Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-11-22
Citations: 707 F. App'x 704
Docket Number: 2018-101
Parties: IN RE: CARBONITE, INC., Petitioner
Judges: Before Prost, Chief Judge, O’Malley and Taranto, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 707
Pages: 704–704

Head Matter:
IN RE: CARBONITE, INC., Petitioner
2018-101
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
Filed: 11/22/2017
Wasif Qureshi, Kyung T. Kim, Jackson Walker LLP, Houston, TX, for Petitioner
Marc Aaron Fenster, Counsel, Reza Mirzaie, Attorney, Russ August & Kabat, Los Angeles, CA, for Respondent
Before Prost, Chief Judge, O’Malley and Taranto, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ON PETITION
ORDER
O'Malley, Circuit Judge.
Carbonite, Inc. petitions for a writ of mandamus directing the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas to dismiss this case for improper venue or, alternatively, to address Carbon-ite's arguments that venue is improper. Specifically, Carbonite argues that the district court clearly abused its discretion in determining that Carbonite's venue defense had been waived and that the Supreme Court's decision in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, — U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 1514, 197 L.Ed.2d 816 (2017) did not constitute an intervening change in law. Realtime Data LLC opposes.
We' recently held that the Supreme Court's decision in TC Heartland effected a relevant change in the law and, more particularly, that failure to present the venue objection earlier did not come within the waiver rule of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(g)(2) and (h)(1). In re Micron Tech., Inc., No. 17-138 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 15, 2017). In light of that decision, we deem it the proper course here for Car-bonite to first move the district court for reconsideration of its order denying the motion to dismiss. We therefore deny the petition for a writ of mandamus. Any new petition for mandamus from the district court's ruling on reconsideration will be considered on its own merits.
Accordingly,
It Is Ordered That:
The petition is denied.