Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 18, 2026

Measuring Sub-23 Nanometer Real Driving Particle Number Emissions Using the Portable DownToTen Sampling System
Published on: May 22, 2020
Who to Sue and Where in ANDA Litigation: Personal Jurisdiction Post-Daimler
Abstract:
Historically, courts have afforded patent holders broad discretion to choose where to sue Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) filers. Patent holders' assertions of jurisdiction have typically rested on general personal jurisdiction theories, frequently based on an ANDA filers' conduct within the state, including sales, submission to previous lawsuits, and assignments of agents to accept service of process. Consequently, manyANDA cases have taken place in the Districts of Delaware or New Jersey, or where the patent holder is incorporated, despite the ANDA filer's incorporation in a different state. However, since the Supreme Court's decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman, options for the exercise of personal jurisdiction over ANDA filers have narrowed. This article examines what Daimler means for future ANDA filers, and highlights how many patent holders have failed to take this change into account.
More Related Videos
12:12Irrelevant Stimuli and Action Control: Analyzing the Influence of Ignored Stimuli via the Distractor-Response Binding Paradigm
Published on: May 14, 2014
09:34Implementation of Portable Emissions Measurement Systems PEMS for the Real-driving Emissions RDE Regulation in Europe
Published on: December 4, 2016
Related Concept Videos
Torts II
Deindividuation
Torts III
Quasi-intentional torts in healthcare involve acts where intent is not directed to harm an individual but results in harm due to careless or reckless speech.
Torts I
Intentional...
Woodward–Hoffmann Selection Rules and Microscopic Reversibility
Attribution Theory