Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

CUPP Cybersecurity LLC v. Symantec Corp.

United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division

December 21, 2018, Decided; December 21, 2018, Filed

Civil Action No. 3:18-CV-01554-M



Defendant Symantec Corporation moves to dismiss this patent case for improper venue. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), a patent case may be brought in the judicial district where (1) the defendant resides, or (2) where the defendant has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business. [*2]  Because Symantec does not reside in this District and Plaintiffs CUPP Cybersecurity, LLC and CUPP Computing AS (collectively, "CUPP") have failed to show that Symantec has a regular and established place of business in this District, venue is not proper in the Northern District of Texas. The Court finds that the interest of justice is best served by transferring this case to the District of Delaware, where Symantec resides.

I. Background

CUPP brings this suit against Symantec, asserting that Symantec has directly and indirectly infringed eight of CUPP's patents that cover software-and hardware-based solutions to problems in mobile device management, network security, demilitarized zone security, and endpoint security.

On August 6, 2018, Symantec moved to dismiss the case for improper venue under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3), or in the alternative, for transfer to the Northern District of California. (ECF No. 31). CUPP responded on August 27, 2018, arguing that venue is proper in this District. (ECF No. 34). In the alternative, CUPP requests venue-related discovery or transfer to the District of Delaware. (Id.). On September 10, 2018, Symantec filed a Reply (ECF No. 36) and a Motion for Leave to File Appendix in [*3]  Support of Reply (ECF No. 38). The Motion for Leave to File Appendix in Support of Reply is GRANTED. Symantec's Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue is ripe for review.

II. Legal Standard

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220880 *


Subsequent History: Transferred by, Motion granted by Cupp Cybersecurity LLC v. Symantec Corp., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37960 (N.D. Tex., Jan. 16, 2019)


servers, venue, established place of business, regular, employees, discovery, home office, infringement, centers, resides, patent, remote, lease, place of business, Communications, customers, Network, lists