Why? forum shopping is nothing new. The EU has a similar problem with Germany's Dusseldorf court, also popular among patent trolls . That's for instance where

Why? forum shopping is nothing new. The EU has a similar problem with Germany's Dusseldorf court, also popular among patent trolls . That's for instance where Apple sued Samsung to gain a quick preliminary injunction years ago with a doctored image of Samsung tablet[1] -- and Apple did get one -- though all of Apple's claims were overturned later, in large part due to Germany's higher legal standard for infringement. Now, do you believe that universities or medical research institutions that do not produce or manufacture a product themselves shouldn't be able to patent their invention only because they are not in the business of producing themselves? A patent is usually for very specific methods or utility that usually doesn't cover a product in entirety (trade dress is a different matter and deals mostly with overall impression). According to an old estimate from RPX, there are over 250+K active patents in modern mobile devices -- you aren't saying that thousands of other inventors not employed by Apple, Samsung or other modern portable device makers, should have no say in patent business? In case of VirnetX, the key executives at the company are also the inventors of the infringed patents -- Robert Dunham Short, Victor Larson. They were granted while they were working for SIAC and later bought by and re-assigned to VirnetX. [1] "Why Apple Went To Dusseldorf," https://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2011/08/24/why-apple-went-to-dusseldorf/?sh=5be8f9b75934 https://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2011/08/24/why-apple...