October Term 2016 · Docket 16-341

Does a corporation reside only where it incorporates for patent venue?

Kraft argues venue follows principal place of business. Heartland argues venue follows incorporation.

Official caption
TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Jay argued definitions matter more than historical context.

    Mr. Dabney framed the choice as upholding or destroying venue protections.

    Mr. Dabney noted venue rules apply to generic drug makers too.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The dispute centers on the definition of corporate residence under 28 U.S.C. 1400(b).

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 27, 2017.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Heartland wants the Court to limit venue to the state of incorporation.

Kraft wants the Court to allow venue in the principal place of business.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Heartland argues Congress defined residence strictly for all venue purposes.

Kraft argues venue should consider the principal place of business.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Ginsburg asked if principal place of business counts for diversity.

Justice Sotomayor asked how the Court handles unincorporated associations.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines where patent suits can begin. It shapes corporate litigation strategy nationwide.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON