[10165]

Fact: Certain federal judges were getting a disproportionate amount of patent cases.

Consider: Over time, it is possible judges in other jurisdictions did not like this. (Why?)

Question: Can anyone assume that these other judges not in, e.g., ED Tx, will not also be "plaintiff-friendly"?

Consider: Being "plaintiff-friendly" can have the effect of more patent cases being filed in the judge's jurisdiction. Further consider that some judges may want more patent cases filed in their jurisdiction.

As such, the headline may be prematurely drawing conclusions. Or not. Will patent litigation continue to rise, will it remain steady, or will it begin to fall?

[bkmartin]

Call it coincidence, or nepotism, or maybe something worse... both of the judges that hear most of the patent cases in ED Tx have son's that represent most of the trolls in court.

I would love to see the Justice Department or FBI investigate the financial relationships between the Judges and their sons. Are they jointly invested in anything that could be used to launder funds and provide kickbacks? Or are these just two fathers that are proud to see their kids get rich?

[rudyfink]

To my knowledge, the statement "both of the judges that hear most of the patent cases in ED Tx have son's that represent most of the trolls in court" is incorrect as written. The comment may be thinking of former judges, who retired in 2015 and 2011, but even for those judges I am skeptical of the "most of the" portion of the assertion. To be clear, the former judges had sons who practiced in ED Tex (and still do), but I would be surprised if they ever represented the most plaintiffs in a given year (either individually or in combination), though I admit I have not pulled the numbers to check.

For the current judges in the district, I am only aware of one who has a child that is an attorney, and to my knowledge that child does not practice in ED Tex (and does not practice in patent cases at all).