For the first time since the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark ruling in TC Heartland, the chief judge of Delaware's district court this week said that companies must have a permanent and physical presence in the state to be sued for patent infringement.

In cases brought by Boston Scientific Corp. and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., U.S. District Chief Judge Leonard P. Stark of the District of Delaware outlined the court's approach for analyzing a key aspect of the patent venue statute that went unaddressed in the high court's May 22 decision.

In TC Heartland, the Supreme Court held that, for the purposes of the patent venue statute, a company “resides” only in its state of incorporation. But the eight justices to consider the case remained silent on what is meant by a “regular and established” place of business in the statute's second prong, leading to dueling interpretations from parties to patent infringement suits.