U.S. District Court of Delaware

U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware: Patent Litigation Profile

The U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, located in Wilmington and part of the Third Circuit, is a leading venue for patent litigation in the United States. Historically, it has been one of the top five busiest patent courts for over a decade. Following the Supreme Court's 2017 decision in TC Heartland, which restricted patent venue to a defendant's state of incorporation or where it has a regular place of business, the court's docket surged due to the large number of U.S. companies incorporated in Delaware. While it has recently been second to the Western District of Texas in total patent case filings, it has often ranked first for the number of patent cases per judgeship. In 2023, the court saw 427 new patent case filings, ranking it third nationally. The court also presides over the majority of Hatch-Waxman (ANDA) pharmaceutical patent cases in the country.

The court is known for its experienced judiciary and sophisticated handling of complex patent disputes, though it is not considered a "rocket docket." The median time to trial is longer than in some other popular patent venues, with one 2022 analysis noting it can take about eight months longer to get to trial compared to the Western District of Texas. The judges are known to prefer resolving complex pharmaceutical patent cases through full bench trials rather than on summary judgment to better assess technical details and witness credibility. The court has a higher-than-average rate of granting stays pending inter partes review (IPR) proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), particularly after an IPR has been instituted.

Unlike some other prominent patent courts, the District of Delaware has deliberately chosen not to adopt a comprehensive set of local patent rules. Instead, patent case management is governed by the court's standard local rules, a "Default Standard for Discovery," and, most importantly, the individual practices and standing orders of the presiding judge. This judge-driven approach requires counsel to be intimately familiar with each judge's specific procedures and scheduling order templates. A notable recent development includes standing orders from Chief Judge Colm F. Connolly requiring parties to disclose third-party litigation funding arrangements. Local Rule 3.2 specifically requires that a copy of the patents-in-suit be attached to the complaint.

The district has handled numerous significant patent disputes, including high-stakes pharmaceutical litigation. A prominent example is the 2016 case where a jury ordered Gilead Sciences to pay Merck $2.54 billion for infringing a patent on a hepatitis C treatment, which at the time was the largest patent damages award in U.S. history. The docket has included cases involving major technology companies, such as the tracked case Sampo IP, LLC v. Facebook, Inc. et al. filed in 2014. Rulings from this court frequently address evolving issues in patent law, such as the preclusive effect of PTAB decisions on district court litigation.

The Delaware bench includes several judges well-versed in patent law. Chief Judge Colm F. Connolly, who has served since 2018, has implemented influential standing orders impacting patent case procedure. Other key judges handling a significant number of patent cases include Judge Richard G. Andrews and Judge Maryellen Noreika. Former Chief Judge Leonard P. Stark, now at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, presided over hundreds of patent cases and was instrumental in shaping the court's patent practice during his tenure.