Case Law Applying Local Patent Rules

Chapter 2 of the Annotated Patent Digest contains material addressing local patent rules and analysis of case law construing and applying the various local rules. Topics covered therein include:

• Federal Circuit’s affirmance that district courts have the authority to impose and enforce local patent rules
• Identification of the district courts that have adopted local patent rules and a summary of those rules
• Identification of case law where district courts not having local patent rules have applied, as part of the Case Management Order, the local patent rules of another court to a specific case
• Collection of case law on local patent rules categorized by individual forum
• Collection of case law on local patent rules categorized by subject matter, e.g., sufficiency of contentions and leave to amend contentions

• Northern District of California (Revised Mar. 1, 2008) and Committee Report
• Southern District of California

• District of Colorado (under consideration)

• Northern District of Georgia

• Northern District of Illinois (effective Oct. 1, 2009)

• District of Massachusetts

• District of Minnesota (Local Rule - Form 4)

• Eastern District of Missouri (Judge Shaw)

• District of New Jersey (Effective Jan. 1, 2009)

• Eastern District of North Carolina

• Southern District of Ohio (Proposed)

• Western District of Pennsylvania

• Eastern District of Texas (last revised Nov. 19, 2007)
• Northern District of Texas (pilot program)
• Southern District of Texas

• Eastern District of Virginia (under consideration)

• Western District of Washington (adopted Nov. 25, 2008)

• Special Procedures Order for Cases Under 28 U.S.C. § 1498 (Judge Damich) (Revised May 22, 2009)

Note: Many other district courts have adopted certain individual procedural rules or standing orders that may impose other procedural requirements on patent cases.