Law360, New York (February 7, 2017, 11:43 AM EST) -- In TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Food Brands Group LLC, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) is the sole and exclusive provision governing venue in patent infringement actions. Pursuant to § 1400(b), venue is proper in patent infringement actions in the judicial district where the defendant resides, or where the defendant has committed "acts of infringement" and has a "regular and established place of business." In Acorda v. Mylan, the Federal Circuit held that an abbreviated new drug application filer is subject to specific personal jurisdiction wherever that ANDA filer plans to sell its generic drug product[1] and, thus, an ANDA filing essentially creates personal jurisdiction in any district nationwide. In ANDA patent cases, like other patent infringement actions, courts have typically applied the broader statute governing venue, 28 U.S.C. § 1391, and found venue proper if the district court has personal jurisdiction over the defendant. TC Heartland contends that § 1400(b) is the sole and exclusive provision governing venue in patent actions and under controlling Supreme Court precedent, the terms of § 1400(b) are not supplemented by § 1391....