Judge blocks Epicrealm 'forum shopping'

Oracle has won a small but significant battle in its scrap with Epicrealm

A Delaware judge has denied a request by Epicrealm to move its legal case against Oracle from a Delaware to an Eastern Texas court. 

Epicrealm owns two patents covering dynamic websites and has filed 13 lawsuits since 2005 demanding licence payments for its intellectual property. 

One of the targeted firms was Safelite, a customer of Oracle's enterprise software, which had demanded that Oracle foot its legal bill as part of its indemnification clause.

Oracle sued Epicrealm last summer, claiming that the patents should be invalidated. The suit was filed in Delaware, where Epicrealm is legally incorporated but has no offices or employees. 

Delaware is a popular business location because of state tax breaks, but Epicrealm's main place of business is in the district in Northern Texas. Epicrealm asked that the case be moved to Eastern Texas where its remaining patent cases are located.

The 26 March denial of that request is just a minor aspect of the legal jousting, but a victory for Oracle nonetheless. Courts in Eastern Texas have a track record of ruling in favour of patent owners.

Epicrealm argued in a legal filing that "(a) the Eastern District, unlike the Northern District, has in place a detailed and effective set of local patent rules; (b) the judges in the Eastern District have a vast experience with patent litigation; and (c) the Eastern District provides a quick time to trial in patent cases".

Five of Epicrealm's witnesses will not be able to travel to Delaware - one of the inventors, one prosecuting attorney, two former chief executives and the firm's general counsel.

Oracle referred to Epicrealm's request as "forum shopping", an attempt to relocate to a court that benefited its legal strategy but lacked any substantial benefits to the efficiency, expense and fairness of the case.

The judge essentially agreed, stating in his ruling that alleged benefits of moving the case are non-existent. He suggested that the company used video taped depositions for witnesses who are unable to attend the case in person.