Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Alan Albright

Alan D. Albright (born November 24, 1959) is a district judge serving on the U.S. District Court for the Western of in its Waco Division. Appointed by President in 2018, Albright has presided over a significant volume of cases, leveraging his prior experience as a patent litigator and magistrate judge to manage complex disputes. Albright earned a B.A. in from Trinity University in 1981 and a J.D. from the University of Texas School of Law in 1984. Following a clerkship with U.S. District Judge James R. Nowlin, he entered private practice focusing on patent litigation before serving as a U.S. magistrate judge for the Western District of from 1992 to 1999. After returning to private practice in Austin, where he handled trials in matters, Albright was nominated to the district bench on January 24, 2018, confirmed by the on August 28, 2018, and commissioned on September 7, 2018. During his tenure, Albright's division in Waco has attracted a disproportionate share of cases—accounting for a substantial portion of nationwide filings at peaks—due to factors including his willingness to hold prompt trials and local rules accommodating non-practicing entities. This has drawn scrutiny, with the Federal Circuit granting writs of in multiple instances to compel transfers to districts with stronger connections to the parties, citing errors in Albright's venue analyses. In response to such rulings, including a 2022 administrative order standardizing case assignments across the district, Albright has adjusted practices while continuing to adjudicate high-stakes disputes against defendants like and .

Early Life and Education

Childhood and Family Background

Alan D. Albright was born on November 24, 1959, in . His father served in the United States Marine Corps, while his mother worked as a nurse. Albright's family relocated to , , when he was five years old, and he grew up in that city. Neither of Albright's parents attended college, and pursuing was not an established family expectation.

Academic and Professional Preparation

Albright earned a degree in from Trinity University in , , graduating in 1981. This undergraduate focus on cultivated foundational analytical skills applicable to legal reasoning and policy analysis. He then attended the University of Texas School of , receiving his in 1984 and becoming a member of the Texas . His law school experience emphasized rigorous legal scholarship, laying groundwork for specialization in advocacy-oriented practice. Following graduation, Albright served as a to U.S. District Judge James R. Nowlin of the Western District of from 1984 to 1985. This clerkship provided hands-on immersion in federal district court operations, including trial preparation and judicial decision-making, fostering early expertise in trial advocacy essential for subsequent patent litigation roles.

Pre-Judicial Legal Career

Private Patent Litigation Practice

Following his admission to the bar in 1984 after earning a J.D. from the University of Texas School of Law, Alan Albright transitioned from an undergraduate background in at Trinity University to a career as a trial lawyer in private practice. After clerking for U.S. District Judge James R. Nowlin from 1984 to 1986, he joined McGinnis, Lochridge & Kilgore LLP in Austin, where his early work centered on insurance litigation. Approximately two years later, he moved to the Austin office of LLP, continuing in general litigation before shifting focus to matters. Albright's patent litigation practice emphasized representation in infringement suits, leveraging hands-on experience in courts. He handled trials involving technical disputes, including proceedings before the International Trade Commission. This period from 1986 to 1992 established his proficiency in complex cases, distinct from his initial non-patent work. Resuming private practice in 1999 after magistrate service, Albright specialized in litigation through 2018, serving as a partner at in Austin from at least 2015 onward and at other Austin firms prior. His representation spanned decades of cases, building trial expertise in venues that informed his approach to disputes without reliance on formal engineering credentials.

Service as Magistrate Judge

Alan D. Albright was appointed as a for the for the Western District of in 1992, serving until 1999. Primarily stationed in the Austin Division, his role involved adjudicating pretrial matters as a non-Article III judicial officer, distinct from the trial responsibilities of district judges. The majority of Albright's duties centered on managing the pretrial phases of civil cases and criminal proceedings, including scheduling conferences, disputes, and motions practice. This encompassed administrative contributions such as overseeing negotiations and issuing reports and recommendations on dispositive motions, with a focus on civil litigation where his prior practice provided specialized insight into complex technical disputes. No comprehensive caseload statistics from this period are publicly detailed, but his handling of pretrial civil matters honed administrative efficiency in high-volume dockets. In 1999, Albright left the position to return to private practice, citing a personal preference for conducting trials over pretrial administration in his self-reported account. This interim service built foundational experience in procedural streamlining and party coordination, emphasizing structured timelines for pretrial milestones without the authority for final trial judgments.

Federal Judicial Appointment

Nomination by President Trump

On January 24, 2018, President Donald Trump nominated Alan D. Albright, a partner at the Austin office of Bracewell LLP, to serve as a United States District Judge for the Western District of Texas. The nomination addressed a judicial vacancy in the district arising from the retirement of Judge Walter Scott Smith, Jr., effective September 14, 2016. Albright's nomination reflected the Trump administration's broader initiative to appoint judges with demonstrated expertise in litigation, prioritizing candidates versed in complex commercial and disputes to handle the District's substantial caseload. His professional background included over two decades of private practice focused on and other matters, positioning him as a specialist for the role. The selection process involved recommendations from Senators and , who endorsed Albright based on his legal experience and character following their review. Standard executive vetting included evaluations by the Counsel's Office and the Department of Justice, encompassing FBI background investigations to assess qualifications and integrity prior to formal submission to the .

Senate Confirmation Process

Albright's advanced through the Judiciary Committee following a hearing on April 25, 2018, where he testified alongside other nominees for district . The committee evaluated his qualifications, including his prior service as a U.S. magistrate in the Western District of Texas from 2010 to 2018 and his experience in private patent litigation, without notable objections raised regarding his background or potential judicial specialization. On May 24, 2018, the committee reported his favorably to the full by . The full confirmed Albright on September 6, 2018, also by , reflecting a lack of recorded opposition during the Republican-controlled chamber's proceedings. This procedural efficiency contrasted with more contentious of the era, as Albright's selection—endorsed by Texas Senators and following a merit selection panel review—faced no significant partisan hurdles or public controversies at the time. Albright received his judicial commission on September 10, 2018, and was sworn in as a U.S. district judge on September 18, 2018, by Chief Judge Orlando Luis Garcia, thereby assuming his Article III position primarily assigned to the Waco Division of the Western District of Texas. His formal occurred later, on May 1, 2019, at in Waco.

Judicial Tenure and Patent Specialization

Establishment of Waco Division Docket

Alan D. Albright assumed office as the sole Article III judge for the Waco Division of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of following his confirmation on September 6, 2018, and swearing-in on September 18, 2018. In this capacity, all civil actions filed in the division, including suits, were by default assigned to him under local rules, establishing a concentrated docket without random distribution among multiple judges. This structural singularity positioned the Waco Division to absorb filings directed there, particularly after the Court's 2017 ruling in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, which curtailed nationwide venue shopping by limiting patent suits to districts where the defendant is incorporated or has a regular and established place of business. The decision shifted litigation away from prior hotspots like the Eastern District of , redirecting volume toward divisions perceived as accommodating based on judicial expertise. Patent filings in Waco escalated sharply post-appointment, with Albright handling zero such cases in late 2018 but projecting 779 new ones in 2020—a 2,682% rise from the division's pre-Albright baseline—driven by his pre-judicial specialization in disputes as a and litigator. By 2021, annual intake reached 932 cases, comprising 23% of all U.S. filings that year, reflecting plaintiffs' strategic venue choices under tightened TC Heartland constraints to secure a single, specialized . Cumulative volume exceeded thousands by mid-decade, underscoring the division's emergence as a focal point amid broader post-TC Heartland redistribution. To address the influx, Albright implemented procedural frameworks via standing orders, such as the Order Governing Proceedings for patent cases, which standardized initial scheduling conferences, discovery timelines, and claim construction briefing to accommodate high volume without altering assignment defaults. These measures, first formalized in early iterations around 2019 and iteratively updated (e.g., April 2022 and January 2024), emphasized early case and expedited paths to , leveraging the sole-judge structure for uniform application.

Management of Patent Caseload

Judge Alan Albright has established procedural rules in the Waco Division of the Western District of that emphasize early claim construction hearings to facilitate prompt resolution of disputes. Under his Standing Order Governing Proceedings in Cases, issued April 14, 2022, parties submit preliminary infringement and invalidity contentions shortly after the case conference (CMC), which occurs approximately 14 days after the filing of the Case Readiness Status Report—due within seven days of the defendant's response to the complaint. The Markman hearing is then scheduled for 23 weeks following the CMC, allowing courts to construe disputed claim terms relatively early in litigation and enabling parties to refine their positions based on definitive interpretations. To further streamline high-volume dockets, Albright's procedures promote consolidated trials for related cases sharing common patents. The standing order requires notification of related filings within 30 days, coordinating schedules to permit a single Markman hearing across multiple actions and tiered briefing limits based on the number of disputed patents, which reduces redundancy and accelerates overall disposition. Trials are set for 52 weeks after the Markman hearing—or as soon as practicable—establishing a fixed trajectory that minimizes extensions except in extreme circumstances, with targeted to align efficiently post-claim construction. Albright demonstrates reluctance to grant stays pending inter partes review (IPR) proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), prioritizing district resolution over administrative pauses. He has denied every contested motion to stay litigation during IPRs, even when post-grant challenges are instituted, citing the need to maintain momentum in the judicial process. Parties must promptly notify the of IPR petitions, providing expected timelines for institution and final written decisions, but stays are evaluated case-by-case without a in favor, reflecting a policy that views PTAB proceedings as complementary rather than halting. These strategies contribute to empirically faster case resolutions in Waco patent matters compared to broader national benchmarks. The division's average time to stands at approximately 24 months, supported by Albright's two-year target from filing to , which his docket record has consistently met or approached in . This pace exceeds the disposition times in districts like the Eastern District of (EDTX), where patent cases often extend beyond 30 months due to less rigid scheduling, positioning Waco as a venue for expedited amid surging filings.

Approach to Trial Scheduling and Efficiency

Albright implemented an expedited scheduling framework for patent cases in the Waco Division, often described as a "rocket docket," to accelerate proceedings from filing through resolution. His standing orders require parties to submit proposed schedules aligning with a default timeline, including a Markman hearing set initially for 23 weeks after the case management conference, typically held shortly after filing. Trials are targeted within two years of the complaint's filing date, with adjustments based on case complexity, number of asserted patents, and inter partes review proceedings. This structure compresses key milestones—such as claim construction, discovery, and —into a condensed period, countering the protracted timelines common in patent litigation due to disputes and involvement. Empirical analysis of cases assigned to Albright from 2019 to 2022 reveals that more than half were initially scheduled for within 24 months of filing, enabling faster amid surging caseloads that peaked at hundreds of annual filings. This efficiency stems from standardized procedures, including early status reports on potential stays and streamlined pretrial conferences, which prioritize docket velocity over extended pretrial maneuvering. By design, the approach promotes judicial economy, allowing resolution of disputes in under two years where national medians often exceed that threshold, thereby reducing backlog accumulation in high-volume venues. The methodology reflects Albright's emphasis on timely access to jury trials for patentees, informed by his pre-bench practice in patent disputes, to mitigate risks like evidence degradation or parallel administrative challenges at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. This causal focus on speed—without routine stays pending inter partes reviews—fosters a docket where cases advance predictably, enhancing overall court throughput during the 2019–2022 influx when Waco handled disproportionate shares of U.S. patent filings.

Venue Selection and Federal Circuit Scrutiny

Attraction of Patent Filings to Waco

Following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC on May 22, 2017, which restricted venue to a defendant's of incorporation or locations of regular and established place of business, filings shifted away from plaintiff-favored districts like the Eastern District of , where new cases dropped from over 40% of national totals pre-2017 to around 10% by 2019. This ruling prompted plaintiffs to seek alternative venues with experienced judges and efficient procedures, leading to the rapid emergence of the Waco Division in the Western District of as a leading forum by 2020. A primary was the structure of the Waco Division as a single-judge division, where filings from October 2019 onward—coinciding with Judge Alan D. Albright's appointment—were automatically assigned to him, providing plaintiffs with high predictability in judicial handling due to his prior litigation experience at a specialized firm. This certainty appealed to plaintiffs seeking consistent application of -savvy procedures, including streamlined scheduling and local rules tailored to disputes, without the variability of multi-judge random assignment common elsewhere. Non-practicing entities (NPEs), which assert patents without producing accused products, disproportionately leveraged this forum, filing cases that emphasized venue predictability over geographic convenience to defendants. By mid-2021, the Waco Division captured over 25% of all U.S. filings, with the Western District as a whole handling approximately 22% of nationwide cases in peak years like 2021, far exceeding its population or economic share. These trends reflected strategic venue shopping under post-TC Heartland rules, where plaintiffs could establish venue ties through minimal defendant contacts while securing a specialized docket.

Criticisms of Reluctance to Transfer Cases

Critics have highlighted Judge Albright's low rate of granting motions to transfer venue in cases filed in the Western District of Texas's Waco Division, with data indicating that he approved only a small fraction of inter-district transfer requests in his early tenure. For instance, analyses of his rulings show grant rates as low as approximately 20-30% for such motions in 2019-2020, compared to higher rates in other districts, prompting accusations that this pattern facilitates plaintiff-driven by allowing cases to remain in a plaintiff-preferred venue despite defendants' arguments for more convenient alternatives. This reluctance has drawn fire from technology companies and defendants, who argue it imposes undue burdens, including substantial travel requirements for witnesses and personnel based primarily in districts like the Northern District of California. In cases involving firms such as Apple and , defendants contended that proceedings in Waco—far from their operational hubs—necessitated frequent flights and accommodations for dozens of employees, escalating costs and logistical challenges without commensurate local ties, as many "presences" in consisted of single offices or employees hired post-lawsuit to anchor venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). The Federal Circuit's appellate interventions underscored these concerns, with grants of mandamus petitions in 2021 and 2022 citing Albright's erroneous weighing of venue factors, such as overemphasizing a defendant's minimal footprint while downplaying the transferee forum's superior convenience for parties, sources of proof, and compulsory process. In one 2021 ruling, the ordered transfer after finding the denial abused discretion by not adequately crediting defendants' evidence of hardship; similar outcomes followed in subsequent cases, where the criticized retention decisions that effectively rewarded strategic filings over balanced public-private interest assessments.

Mandamus Petitions and Appellate Interventions

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued multiple writs of between 2021 and 2023 directing Judge Alan Albright to transfer cases out of the Western District of , Waco Division, after he denied defendants' motions under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). These interventions critiqued Albright's weighing of private and public interest factors, particularly his treatment of witness convenience, party location, and local interest, where the found clear abuses of in deeming proposed transferee forums—like the Northern District of California—not "clearly more convenient." In 2021 alone, the Federal Circuit granted 18 of 30 such petitions targeting Albright's orders, an unusually high rate reflecting heightened scrutiny of venue rulings in his court. A prominent example occurred in In re DISH Network L.L.C., No. 21-182 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 21, 2021), where the court granted mandamus after Albright denied transfer to the District of Colorado, a venue tied to DISH's headquarters and key witnesses. The Federal Circuit held that Albright erred by neutralizing the local interest factor despite the events' lack of connection to Texas and by underweighting private interest factors favoring Colorado, such as compulsory process for non-party witnesses and cost efficiencies for Colorado-based personnel. Similar critiques appeared in cases involving Apple Inc., including a November 2021 grant reversing Albright's local interest analysis, which had minimized ties to transferee districts despite evidence of innovation and operations there. These rulings emphasized that patent disputes over nationwide technologies generate minimal "localized" interests in divisions like Waco, absent specific community impacts. Following initial grants, appellate standards evolved to stress rigorous, evidence-based application of § 1404(a) factors, prompting Albright to incorporate Federal Circuit guidance—such as reduced deference to his own docket efficiency—into subsequent orders. However, persistent denials led to further interventions, including a 2022 writ in a case against Apple directing expedited transfer rulings to preempt delays. By 2023, while grant rates declined, the cumulative effect reassigned dozens of cases, underscoring a circuit-wide resistance to venue selections driven by judge-specific practices rather than statutory convenience. This pattern marked a procedural anomaly, with mandamus serving as a supervisory tool against perceived forum manipulation in patent litigation.

Reforms to Case Assignment

2022 District-Wide Reassignment Order

In July 2022, Chief Judge Orlando Garcia of the for the Western District of issued an order revising the assignment procedures for patent cases filed in the district's Waco Division. The order, effective July 25, 2022, terminated the prior practice of automatically assigning all such cases to U.S. District Judge Alan D. Albright, who was the sole Article III judge stationed in Waco at the time. Under the new policy, patent cases filed on or after July 25, 2022, in the Waco Division are randomly assigned from a pool of 12 district judges across the Western District, excluding magistrate judges and judges. This district-wide randomization applied specifically to initial assignments, aiming to distribute the caseload more evenly among active judges. The reform was motivated by widespread complaints from the patent bar and interventions from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit regarding perceived judge-shopping, where plaintiffs strategically filed in Waco to secure Albright's assignment due to his specialized docket and rulings favorable to certain venue retention practices. Court records and legal analyses confirmed that the order sought to mitigate these forum-shopping incentives by eliminating the predictability of judicial assignment based on division. Implementation led to an immediate reduction in Albright's patent caseload from the Waco Division, with his assignments dropping to approximately one-twelfth of new filings, aligning with the random pool's proportion, as tracked by litigation in the weeks following the order's effective date. This shift was verified through docket data showing diversified assignments starting July 26, 2022.

Ongoing Related-Case Rules and Their Effects

Following the implementation of district-wide randomization for cases in the Western District of Texas, local rules permitted the reassignment of newly filed actions to a judge if they were deemed related to prior cases already on that judge's docket, based on factors such as overlapping parties, s, or claims. This exception, rooted in efficiency considerations under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a), allowed Judge Albright to receive cases linked to his extensive pre-randomization portfolio, which exceeded 1,000 actions by mid-2022. In practice, such reassignments have sustained Albright's dominance in Waco Division filings, with him handling 48% of cases initiated there in the second quarter of 2024. Plaintiffs have adapted filing strategies to exploit this relatedness mechanism, often by explicitly referencing existing Albright-assigned cases on civil cover sheets or in complaints to assert connections via shared defendants, patent families, or operative facts. This approach has resulted in disproportionate allocations despite randomization, as initial assignments to other judges are frequently transferred upon motion, preserving Albright's caseload at 43% of the division's total patent matters through early 2024. Such tactics reflect litigant preferences for Albright's procedural rigor, including expedited scheduling and reluctance to grant stays pending inter partes review at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. These rules have maintained Albright as one of the nation's leading recipients of cases into , even as overall Waco filings declined from peak levels, underscoring the persistence of venue selection incentives tied to judicial specialization. Critics from defendant-aligned groups argue this perpetuates by enabling plaintiffs to engineer relatedness, potentially undermining randomization's intent to distribute workloads evenly across the district's 12 active judges. Empirical data indicate no significant dilution of Albright's share absent further procedural constraints, with his docket comprising over 40% of Waco s in multiple quarters post-reform.

2024 Updates to Patent Case Procedures

On May 30, 2024, Chief District Judge issued an administrative order mandating random assignment of all patent cases (Nature of Suit Codes 830 and 835) filed in the Waco Division among 13 district judges across the Western District of Texas's divisions, including judges in , El Paso, and Austin. This change extended prior assignment rules to explicitly cover related cases, requiring parties to file a motion with detailed legal and factual justification for any consolidation rather than permitting automatic transfer to a single judge. The order sought to distribute caseloads more equitably and reduce incentives for plaintiffs to file in Waco specifically to secure assignment to Judge Albright, who had previously handled the majority of such cases due to the division's single-judge structure. Earlier in the year, on , 2024, Judge Albright promulgated an updated Standing Order Governing Proceedings (version 4.4) for patent cases assigned to him, refining protocols for initial disclosures, claim construction, and trial preparation to streamline litigation while maintaining his emphasis on early resolution. These procedures required parties to submit detailed infringement and invalidity contentions within 60 days of the initial scheduling conference and mandated prompt identification of potential issues. The updates built on prior versions by incorporating feedback from practitioners but preserved Albright's practice of aggressive scheduling to expedite cases toward trial or settlement. In December 2024, Judge Albright relocated his chambers from the Waco Division to the Austin Division, with confirmed on December 12 pending approval from the Fifth Circuit. This transition, effective into early 2025, eliminated Waco's sole district judgeship vacancy and shifted Albright's oversight to Austin's docket, potentially redirecting future patent filings away from Waco while allowing him to retain certain transferred cases. These 2024 developments contributed to a stabilization rather than a full decline in the district's activity, with the remaining among the top three venues for new filings by defendants added in the first quarter of 2025, though filings had decreased from pre-reform peaks. The mechanism and relocation did not eliminate Waco's appeal for plaintiffs, as evidenced by ongoing filings, but they fostered broader distribution across judges like David Counts, who handled approximately 6% of national cases by mid-2025.

Notable Rulings Beyond Patents

Challenges to Texas Legislation

In October 2025, U.S. District Judge Alan Albright issued a permanent injunction against key provisions of Texas House Bill 900, known as the READER Act, which mandated that booksellers and vendors rate materials sold to public schools for sexually explicit or sexually relevant content. This followed his preliminary injunction on August 31, 2023, which temporarily blocked enforcement shortly before the law's effective date. Albright ruled the rating requirements unconstitutional under the First Amendment, citing overbreadth doctrine as the provisions compelled speech from private actors without adequate tailoring, potentially chilling protected expression by authors, publishers, and booksellers. He emphasized that while states hold authority over school curricula, the law's delegation of subjective ratings to vendors imposed undue burdens on commercial speech, drawing on precedents like Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc. (2011) for scrutiny of content-based regulations. Earlier, in August 2025, Albright granted a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of Bill 2337 against major proxy advisory firms (ISS) and . The law, effective September 1, 2025, required disclosure of "nonpecuniary" factors—such as (DEI) or (ESG) considerations—in voting recommendations, aiming to curb perceived ideological influences in . Albright found the mandates likely violated the First Amendment by compelling disclosure of internal methodologies, treating advice as protected speech akin to financial analysis rather than pure commerce. The ruling invoked for regulations targeting specific viewpoints, referencing cases like Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta (2021) on disclosure burdens, while noting potential under securities laws but prioritizing free speech analysis. These decisions underscore Albright's application of First Amendment precedents to state regulatory efforts, prioritizing empirical limits on over legislative aims to protect minors or align investments with state priorities, without deference to unproven assumptions about content harms.

Labor and Regulatory Enforcement Cases

In Space Exploration Technologies Corp. v. (filed February 2024), Judge Albright granted a preliminary on July 25, 2024, halting an NLRB proceeding (case 19-CA-309274) alleging unlawful firing of employees who criticized company practices on . Albright ruled that the NLRB's structure violates Article II of the by insulating board members from at-will presidential removal, despite their exercise of substantial executive power through prosecutorial, , and adjudicative functions. This determination extended to NLRB administrative law judges (ALJs), whom Albright deemed principal officers unconstitutionally shielded from removal, drawing on the Fifth Circuit's 2022 invalidating similar protections for ALJs. The applied solely to the proceeding, though the NLRB appealed to the Fifth Circuit. Albright's analysis emphasized that removal restrictions prevent effective executive control over labor enforcement, contrasting the NLRB's broad authority with the narrow exceptions under (1935) for purely quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial roles. He rejected NLRB arguments distinguishing its ALJs from those invalidated in cases, finding no material differences in tenure protections or enforcement impacts. This preserved SpaceX's right to a in federal court rather than NLRB administrative proceedings, highlighting structural incentives for agency overreach in labor disputes. In a parallel ruling on July 23, 2024, Albright issued an in a case against an energy firm (J-3 LLC d/b/a Ripe ), blocking NLRB enforcement of charges on identical constitutional grounds regarding board member and ALJ removal protections. These decisions disrupted NLRB operations in Texas-filed challenges, prompting appeals and underscoring tensions between agency autonomy and presidential accountability in regulatory enforcement. As of October 2025, the Fifth Circuit has not resolved the appeals, leaving the injunctions in effect for the affected cases.

Evaluations of Judicial Philosophy

Strengths in Expediting Complex Litigation

Albright's implementation of a fast-track scheduling order in cases has resulted in median times to trial of approximately 24 months for trials and 23.9 months for bench trials in the Western District of , shorter than many other districts where timelines often exceed three years. This expedited approach targets resolution within two years from filing, reducing the economic burdens associated with prolonged uncertainty, such as ongoing infringement and investment disincentives for innovators. By prioritizing swift docket management, Albright's procedures facilitate more effective enforcement of property rights, particularly for plaintiffs facing delays in venues perceived as less accommodating to infringement claims. This counters systemic lags in alternative forums, enabling patentees to secure remedies before technological obsolescence or market shifts erode value, thereby upholding causal incentives for and . Empirical outcomes under Albright include elevated rates of cases proceeding to relative to summary judgments or dismissals prevalent elsewhere, promoting comprehensive fact-finding through verdicts rather than abbreviated procedural dispositions. Such higher trial incidence, supported by structured early disclosures and claim construction timelines, enhances the reliability of infringement determinations by integrating evidentiary depth over expediency-driven shortcuts.

Criticisms from Technology Sector Stakeholders

Technology sector stakeholders, including operating companies and anti-troll advocacy groups, have accused Judge Alan Albright of fostering a pro-patentee environment that disproportionately benefits non-practicing entities (NPEs) by making the Western District of Texas a magnet for suits. In a November 3, 2021, letter to , Democratic U.S. Senators , Christopher Coons, , and highlighted Albright's "extreme concentration" of cases, noting that roughly 25% of all U.S. litigation was pending before him at the time, and criticized his open solicitation of patent suits as enabling NPEs—derisively termed "patent trolls"—to impose undue burdens on defendants through . Critics point to asymmetric outcomes in Albright's rulings as evidence of bias favoring patentees, particularly in denying motions to invalidate patents on eligibility grounds under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Through his first three years on the bench, Albright rejected all 10 such motions despite the asserted patents often involving abstract ideas implemented via generic computing, a category routinely invalidated under Corp. v. CLS Bank International in other districts; his first grants of Alice-based invalidation did not occur until December 2021. This pattern, according to stakeholders like the (EFF) and aligned analysts, sustains low-quality patents and elevates defense costs for technology firms confronting NPE assertions. Allegations of manipulated local presence have fueled claims that Albright overlooks sham offices established by plaintiffs solely to anchor venue in his division. Technology defendants, including Apple Inc., have repeatedly petitioned the Federal Circuit for relief after Albright denied transfer motions, arguing that plaintiffs' "local" operations—often minimal presences like mailboxes or single employees—do not justify overriding convenience factors favoring defendants' home districts such as the Northern District of California. The has granted such petitions in multiple instances, including a 2021 wave of reversals where it found Albright's denials constituted "clear abuse of discretion" by overemphasizing plaintiff-chosen venue and local interest while undervaluing witness travel burdens on out-of-state tech employees. Broader critiques from entities like Patent Progress assert that Albright's practices undermine innovation by redirecting cases to Waco, generating an estimated 880 additional lawsuits over 33 months that would otherwise have filed elsewhere, thereby inflating litigation expenses for defendants without commensurate merits screening. Companies such as Apple have echoed this in ongoing transfer disputes, portraying the district's appeal as a tactical hindrance to efficient resolution in forums with deeper technological expertise.

Defenses Emphasizing Property Rights Protection

Defenders of Judge Albright's handling of patent cases argue that his approach robustly safeguards rights, which serve as essential incentives for by enabling inventors to recoup substantial costs. Empirical analyses indicate that stronger enforcement correlates with heightened R&D expenditures, as firms increase investments when assured of exclusive rights to commercialize discoveries. For instance, cross-country studies find that enhancements in patent protection lead to elevated patent filings and associated R&D activity, particularly in sectors reliant on technological advancement. This causal link underscores the property rights framework underpinning patents, where infringement deterrence prevents free-riding and sustains long-term inventive output. Criticisms portraying Albright as overly permissive toward patentees are countered by evidence of his balanced , which refutes claims of while upholding property protections. In jury trials overseen by Albright through mid-2023, plaintiffs prevailed in approximately 55% of verdicts reaching , a rate aligning closely with national averages and demonstrating no disproportionate favoritism. Moreover, Albright has issued rulings invalidating patents, including his first grants of motions under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for subject-matter ineligibility in December 2021, following prior denials that reflected case-specific merits rather than blanket deference. Such outcomes, alongside defendant victories like the 2023 dismissal of infringement claims against Cisco Systems in a $121 million dispute, illustrate an even-handed of validity challenges. Opposition from sector advocates, often emphasizing anti-patent sentiments in appellate circuits, overlooks the incentive distortions arising from lax , which empirical links to reduced funding. By prioritizing expeditious resolution of disputes—without undue stays pending administrative reviews—Albright's docket preserves the temporal value of property rights, countering erosion that could suppress R&D allocation toward high-risk breakthroughs. This methodology aligns with foundational economic rationales for patents as excludable assets, fostering causal investment in knowledge creation over mere replication.

References

  1. [1]
    Albright, Alan D - Federal Judicial Center |
    Born 1959 in Dauphin, PA Federal Judicial Service: Judge, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas Nominated by Donald J. Trump on January 24, ...
  2. [2]
    [PDF] Hon. Alan D Albright - Federal Bar Association
    In his short time on the bench since September 2018,. Judge Albright's court has seen more new patent cases than are known to have been heard in the entire ...Missing: United | Show results with:United
  3. [3]
    Hon. Alan Albright - National Docketing Association
    From 1992 to 1999, Alan served as a United States Magistrate Judge in the Austin Division of the Western District of Texas. He also served for several years as ...
  4. [4]
    One-on-One with Federal Judge Alan Albright | Magna Legal Services
    But Alan Albright, a federal judge for the Western District of Texas, can make the connection. Albright has otherwise been busy this past year, holding trials ...
  5. [5]
    The Federal Circuit's Obsession with Judge Albright is Becoming ...
    Sep 29, 2021 · Judge Albright, in his ruling denying transfer, pointed to the fact that no evidence was presented suggesting that any witness would be ...Missing: notable controversies
  6. [6]
    (Judge) Shop 'til you Drop: The Wild West of Patent Venue
    Apr 14, 2024 · Judge Albright has been the center of much of the controversy here, with his rulings being criticized multiple times in various mandamus ...
  7. [7]
    after Federal Circuit order in Google case, Judge Albright denies ...
    Apr 27, 2024 · Judicial economy matters: after Federal Circuit order in Google case, Judge Albright denies Microsoft's transfer motion. Florian Mueller. April ...
  8. [8]
    Judge Albright Wrongly Held That Loan Default Caused Standing ...
    May 3, 2024 · Albright dismissed a case brought by Intellectual Tech LLC (IT) against Zebra Technologies due to lack of standing, holding that because the ...
  9. [9]
    New Central Texas federal judge sworn in
    Sep 18, 2018 · Albright was born on Nov. 24, 1959 in Hershey, Pa., earned a B.A. degree at Trinity University in 1981, and graduated from the University of ...Missing: life childhood background
  10. [10]
    Alan Albright – Nominee for the U.S. District Court for the Western ...
    May 17, 2018 · Background. Alan D. Albright was born on November 24, 1959 in Hershey, PA. After getting a B.A. from Trinity University in 1981, Albright ...Missing: education | Show results with:education
  11. [11]
    Waco Federal Judge Alan Albright
    Judge Alan D. Albright was a federal magistrate judge and Austin intellectual property attorney before being appointed by President Trump and approved by the ...Missing: biography | Show results with:biography
  12. [12]
    Texas' busiest patent judge shows no signs of slowing down | Reuters
    Jun 30, 2021 · Albright, who was born in Hershey, Pennsylvania and grew up in San Antonio, didn't know Waco well before joining the bench there and was ...Missing: childhood | Show results with:childhood<|separator|>
  13. [13]
    Hon. Alan D. Albright - The Federalist Society
    Oct 8, 2020 · Before practicing law in Austin, he earned a BA in Political Science from Trinity University in San Antonio and a J.D. from The University of ...Missing: education background undergraduate
  14. [14]
    [PDF] Judge Albright Biography
    Judge Alan Albright is the federal district judge for the Western District of Texas, Waco. Division. He was nominated by President Trump in January 2018, Judge ...Missing: D. | Show results with:D.
  15. [15]
    Alan Albright - Ballotpedia
    Education. Albright received his undergraduate degree from Trinity University in 1981 and his J.D. from the University of Texas School of Law in 1984.Missing: background | Show results with:background
  16. [16]
    Find A Lawyer | Alan D. Albright - State Bar of Texas
    Mr. Alan D. Albright. Eligible to Practice in Texas · Contact Information · COURTS OF ADMITTANCE · Practice information · Law school · Public disciplinary history.
  17. [17]
    The Hon. Alan D. Albright - The American Law Institute
    Before practicing law in Austin, he earned a BA in Political Science from Trinity University in San Antonio and a J.D. from The University of Texas School of ...Missing: biography | Show results with:biography
  18. [18]
    The rise and fall of a Texas patent court | Courthouse News Service
    Oct 28, 2022 · He spent years in private practice before that, handling patent cases for decades. Within months, Albright was positioning himself as the ...
  19. [19]
    Alan Albright - Wikipedia
    Alan D Albright (born November 24, 1959) is a United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas.Biography · Federal judicial service · Controversy · Judicial Reassignment Order...
  20. [20]
    None
    Error: Could not load webpage.<|separator|>
  21. [21]
    https://ipwatchdog.com/people/hon-alan-d-albright/
  22. [22]
    Hon. Alan D. Albright - IPWatchdog.com
    He also previously served as U.S. Magistrate Judge for the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas from 1992-1999. He is a graduate ...
  23. [23]
    PN1523 — Alan D. Albright — The Judiciary 115th Congress (2017 ...
    Alan D. Albright, of Texas, to be United States District Judge for the Western District of Texas, vice Walter S. Smith, Jr., retired.
  24. [24]
    Cruz, Cornyn Praise the Judicial Nominations of Barker, Kernodle ...
    Jan 23, 2018 · “I was proud to recommend Alan Albright, Cam Barker, Jeremy Kernodle, and Michael Truncale to the President based on their legal acumen, ...
  25. [25]
    Nominations | United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
    Apr 25, 2018 · Panel II ; Alan D. Albright. to be United States District Judge for the Western District of Texas ; Thomas S. Kleeh. to be United States District ...Missing: 2019 | Show results with:2019
  26. [26]
    Sens. Cruz, Cornyn on Senate Confirmation of Alan Albright as ...
    Jun 9, 2018 · “I am grateful my colleagues have confirmed Judge Albright to the Western District of Texas,” Sen. Cruz said. “Texans will be well served by ...<|separator|>
  27. [27]
    Albright sworn in as new federal judge in Waco
    Sep 18, 2018 · Albright sworn in as new federal judge in Waco. Tommy Witherspoon; Sep 18, 2018; Sep 18, 2018 ...
  28. [28]
    Investiture of the Honorable Alan D. Albright - Western District of Texas
    On May 1, 2019, at McLane Stadium in Waco, the Western District of Texas held the investiture ceremony for the Honorable Alan D. Albright, U.S. District Judge ...Missing: swearing date
  29. [29]
    Alan D. Albright - Practicalities of Modern Patent Litigation Conference
    Before practicing law in Austin, he earned a BA in Political Science from Trinity University in San Antonio and a J.D. from The University of Texas School of ...Missing: background career<|control11|><|separator|>
  30. [30]
    The Patent Litigation Explosion in the Western District of Texas
    Waco's sole federal judge, Alan Albright—who ... If current trends hold, Judge Albright alone will receive 779 patent cases in 2020, an increase of 2682%!.
  31. [31]
    Reign Turns to Clouds—The Western District of Texas ...
    In 2021, 932 patent cases, or 23% of all patent cases, were filed before Judge Albright in the Waco Division. Compare this to the Waco Division receiving a ...
  32. [32]
    [PDF] Standing-Order-Governing-Proceedings-Patent-Cases-01232024.pdf
    Jan 23, 2024 · SIGNED this 23rd day of January, 2024. ALAN D ALBRIGHT. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE. Page 13. 13. OGP Version 4.4. XII. APPENDIX A – EXEMPLARY ...
  33. [33]
    None
    ### Summary of Judge Albright's Procedures for Patent Cases
  34. [34]
    What to Know About WDTX Standing Order for Patent Cases - Law360
    Feb 8, 2024 · US District Judge Alan D. Albright of the Western District of Texas' Waco Division, recently signed an updated standing order governing proceedings for patent ...
  35. [35]
    [PDF] A Guide To West Texas Patent Cases Before Albright: Part 1
    Jul 1, 2020 · The centerpiece of patent practice in Judge Albright's court is his order governing proceedings for patent cases, or OGP. The OGP was first ...
  36. [36]
    How West Texas Patent Trial Speed Affects PTAB Denials
    Feb 16, 2021 · Patent owners have also cited the fact that Judge Albright has denied every contested motion to stay pending a post-grant proceeding. [20] ...Missing: reluctance | Show results with:reluctance
  37. [37]
    Chief Judge of Western District of Texas Changes Waco Patent ...
    Jul 28, 2022 · This influx of patent cases into Waco is attributable both to Judge Albright's practices and procedures and his expressed desire to handle ...Missing: caseload | Show results with:caseload
  38. [38]
    A new “rocket docket” for patent litigation in the US | White & Case LLP
    Sep 18, 2020 · Second, Judge Albright's procedural schedule is particularly rapid, making it attractive to patent plaintiffs (with a fast schedule and ...
  39. [39]
    [PDF] How Quickly are Judge Albright Patent Cases Going to Trial?
    Aug 17, 2025 · One of them had extensions totaling 11 months, taking the time to trial from just under 22 months to almost 33 months. ... How Quickly are Judge ...
  40. [40]
    Patent Rocket Docket: Let's move things along - Irwin IP
    Oct 5, 2020 · To further drive efficient case resolution, the Markman hearing is scheduled (on Judge Albright's default schedule) for 23 weeks after the case ...Missing: consolidated | Show results with:consolidated
  41. [41]
    How top US patent courts compare on median time-to-trial statistics
    ... Judge Alan Albright's speedy trial schedule offers a chance to advance to a trial sooner than in many other courts. But the median time-to-trial metrics in ...
  42. [42]
    Judge Albright's Latest Rules Ensure the WDTXs Place as the New ...
    Nov 27, 2020 · Parties in his courtroom with a patent dispute will quickly learn that they have a judge with deep experience with patent cases, local rules ...
  43. [43]
    Judge Albright Issues Updated Standing Order for Patent Cases
    Oct 28, 2021 · Judge Alan Albright issued a new standing order governing proceedings for patent cases, which contains many refinements to his procedures.
  44. [44]
    EDTX's Resurgence as the Top Patent Hot Spot
    Mar 6, 2025 · In December 2024, Judge Alan Albright moved from Waco to Austin. See here: Albright, Patent Lawsuit Magnet, Said to Be Shifting to Austin. the ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  45. [45]
    State of the Union - Waco Patent Litigation
    Feb 5, 2020 · While the Eastern District of Texas has seen a drop in patent filings in 2018 and again 2019, as a direct result of TC Heartland, it still ...Missing: impact | Show results with:impact
  46. [46]
    [PDF] Why Is My Company Being Sued For Patent Infringement In Waco ...
    Oct 1, 2020 · A defendant sued for patent infringement in Waco, Texas, should expect orderly case management with a predictable schedule leading to a prompt ...Missing: lawsuits | Show results with:lawsuits
  47. [47]
    A race between West Texas and Delaware for the patent venue of ...
    Mar 9, 2021 · In the aftermath of TC Heartland, the District of Delaware supplanted the Eastern District of Texas as the patent venue of choice. Many ...
  48. [48]
    2022 Patent Dispute Report: First Half in Review
    Jul 1, 2022 · The Texas Western District (led almost entirely by the Waco division), with 389 NPE cases, accounts for 21.1% of all patent litigation in the US ...Missing: peak | Show results with:peak<|control11|><|separator|>
  49. [49]
    Chief Judge of Western District of Texas does Chief ... - FOSS Patents
    Jul 26, 2022 · Judge Alan Albright managed to attract roughly a quarter of all U.S. patent infringement complaints to the Waco division of the United ...<|separator|>
  50. [50]
    Redistributing: The Implications of Assigning Judge Albright's ...
    Judge Albright is also attractive to plaintiffs since he typically refuses to stay patent cases pending ... patent litigation through procedures such as IPR ...
  51. [51]
    [PDF] Data: Ups and downs of west Texas transfer motions - Baker Botts
    Feb 9, 2023 · Another factor that has changed since Albright first started hearing cases is the fact that he's no longer the de facto patent judge in Waco.Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
  52. [52]
    Judge Albright and Transfers of Patent Cases - White & Case LLP
    Jul 15, 2021 · Judge Alan Albright, one of the most active patent jurists, recently amended his standing orders to clarify inter-district transfers and venue ...
  53. [53]
    Criticism of Judge Albright Looms Large in Tillis Letters to Hirshfeld ...
    Nov 3, 2021 · Albright is unmistakably the subject of both letters, which expressed serious concerns about “unrealistic trial dates” and “open solicit[ation]” ...
  54. [54]
    Federal Circuit Grants Another Petition For Mandamus Ordering ...
    This order is the latest in a recent string of CAFC orders granting defendants' petitions for writs of mandamus ordering Judge Albright to either (i) decide the ...
  55. [55]
    Federal Circuit Reins in Albright Again, Orders Quick Ruling on ...
    Nov 8, 2022 · Federal Circuit Reins in Albright Again, Orders Quick Ruling on Apple's Venue Transfer Motion. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal ...
  56. [56]
    October | 2021 | Patently-O
    For mandamus petitions challenging transfer denials by Judge Albright, the Federal Circuit's grant rate is 56.5% (13 grants, 10 denials). And that grant rate ...<|separator|>
  57. [57]
    Federal Circuit Orders Transfer Of Another Judge Albright Case
    Nov 3, 2021 · When a court's denial of a motion to transfer clearly contravenes governing legal standards and is an abuse of discretion, a mandamus to ...Missing: reluctance shopping<|separator|>
  58. [58]
    Federal Circuit Grants Mandamus to Dish, Ordering Albright to ...
    Oct 22, 2021 · In December of 2019, BBiTV filed suit accusing DISH's set-up boxes and mobile device applications that provide video-on-demand functionality of ...
  59. [59]
    Federal Circuit's Wave of Judge Albright Transfer Reversals Keeps ...
    Oct 8, 2021 · That November, the appellate court granted a mandamus petition from Apple (in In re: Apple), ruling that Judge Albright erred in concluding that ...
  60. [60]
    In Re DISH NETWORK L.L.C. , No. 21-182 (Fed. Cir. 2021) :: Justia
    ORDER This is the second petition for a writ of mandamus filed by DISH Network, L.L.C. challenging the denial of its motion to transfer this case brought by ...
  61. [61]
    Federal Circuit Continues Steady Drip Of Judge Albright Venue ...
    Jul 6, 2022 · Federal Circuit Continues Steady Drip Of Judge Albright Venue Rebukes After 2021's Mandamus Wave ... Judge Albright denied the motion in February ...
  62. [62]
    Extraordinary Writ or Ordinary Remedy? Mandamus at the Federal ...
    Dec 18, 2022 · Mandamus permits a litigant who is dissatisfied with a lower court ruling to obtain immediate reversal if, among other things, the ruling was indisputably ...
  63. [63]
    Western District of Texas Issues New Order Regarding Judicial ...
    Jul 27, 2022 · Since his appointment, Judge Albright's practices and rulings have been seen as pro-patentee by some. For example, as a procedural matter, Judge ...
  64. [64]
    The Impact of New Patent Litigation Assignments Rules ... - Goodwin
    Apr 26, 2023 · During March 2023, 37 patent cases were filed in the Western District's Waco Division, and Judge Albright received only five of them (14%). In ...Missing: caseload growth
  65. [65]
    https://www.gtlaw.com/en/insights/2022/7/patent-cases-filed-in-waco-texas-no-longer-automatically-assigned-to-judge-alan-albright
  66. [66]
    Patent Cases Filed in Waco, Texas No Longer Automatically ...
    Jul 28, 2022 · In other words, patent cases filed in Waco are no longer necessarily destined for Judge Alan Albright. Judge Albright, a former patent ...
  67. [67]
    New WDTX Order Shakes Up Initial Judge Assignments - IP Update
    Jul 28, 2022 · A recent order from Chief Judge Garcia is changing how judges are initially assigned to cases filed in the Waco Division of WDTX.Missing: shopping | Show results with:shopping
  68. [68]
    New Case-Assignment Order Marks Next Step in Curbing Judge ...
    Jun 27, 2024 · As a result, even following the randomization order in 2023, Albright received 189 patent cases, equaling 43% of the total caseload for the ...Missing: management procedures<|separator|>
  69. [69]
    Judge Albright Still Sees Most of Waco's Patent Cases, but a New ...
    Jul 17, 2024 · Judge Albright has continued to receive a disproportionate share of Waco's patent litigation despite that order, with 48% of Waco's Q2 filings ending up before ...Missing: growth | Show results with:growth
  70. [70]
    Patent Litigation Update - February 2023 - Quinn Emanuel
    Feb 28, 2023 · Whether patent cases filed in the Waco Division will continue to be assigned to Judge Albright remains uncertain in light of data from July 25, ...
  71. [71]
    [PDF] Order-re-Patent-Cases-05302024.pdf - Western District of Texas
    May 30, 2024 · ASSIGMENT OF PATENT CASES IN THE WACO DIVISION​​ § 137, all civil cases involving patents (Nature of Suit Codes 830 and 835), filed in the Waco ...Missing: effects caseload 2025<|separator|>
  72. [72]
    Assignment rules in Western District of Texas now cover ... - ip fray
    Jun 5, 2024 · In July 2022, then-Chief Judge Orlando Garcia entered an order according to which any new patent cases would be assigned randomly (PDF).
  73. [73]
    High-Volume Plaintiffs Turning Away from the Western District of Texas
    Aug 15, 2024 · As for Judge Alan Albright of the Western District of Texas, he was third with 31 cases (5 percent). Judge Sean Jordan of the Eastern District ...
  74. [74]
    Albright Confirms Move To Austin, Pending 5th Circ. Sign-Off - Law360
    Law360 (December 12, 2024, 4:47 PM EST) -- U.S. District Judge Alan Albright is in the process of moving from the Western District of Texas' Waco division ...Missing: relocation | Show results with:relocation
  75. [75]
    Albright, Patent Lawsuit Magnet, Said to Be Shifting to Austin
    Dec 11, 2024 · Albright, Patent Lawsuit Magnet, Said to Be Shifting to Austin ... U.S. District Judge Alan Albright. U.S. District Court for the Western District ...Missing: magistrate departure
  76. [76]
    Waco's federal judge moving to Austin, magistrate on 'medical leave'
    Jan 31, 2025 · Albright, Waco's lone federal district judge, confirmed he will be moving to Austin, where he will take over one of two district court vacancies ...Missing: parents | Show results with:parents
  77. [77]
    East Texas Stayed in First Place in Q1, Trailed by Delaware and ...
    May 21, 2025 · Top Patent Litigation Districts in Q1 2025 (Defendants Added and Percentage of Total) ... Waco Division, where he is the only district judge.
  78. [78]
    From Waco to Washington: How Texas, the Federal Circuit, and ...
    Jun 4, 2025 · The WDTX, once the top district for patent filings under Judge Alan Albright ... patent filings, handle far fewer cases than the Eastern and ...
  79. [79]
    https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/publisher-news/article/93211-in-a-blistering-opinion-judge-officially-blocks-texas-book-rating-law.html
  80. [80]
    In a Blistering Opinion, Judge Officially Blocks Texas Book Rating Law
    Sep 19, 2023 · Judge Alan D. Albright has delivered a substantive 59-page written opinion and order officially blocking Texas's controversial book rating ...Missing: legislation | Show results with:legislation<|separator|>
  81. [81]
    https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/texas-sex-content-rating-law-for-books-ruled-unconstitutional
  82. [82]
    https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/texas-esg-investment-disclosure-law-blocked-by-federal-judge
  83. [83]
    Texas ESG Investment Disclosure Law Blocked by Judge (Correct)
    Aug 29, 2025 · A Texas ESG law won't go into effect next week, a federal judge ruled from the bench Thursday, halting the requirement that proxy advisory ...
  84. [84]
    Judge Blocks Texas Law Restricting DEI and ESG Proxy Voting Advice
    Sep 2, 2025 · SB 2337 went into effect on September 1 and restricts proxy advisors from using “non-financial” advice, such as DEI and ESG insights, in their ...
  85. [85]
    Federal judge halts Texas law focused on proxy advisors
    Sep 3, 2025 · On Aug. 29, 2025, U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Texas Alan Albright issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of ...
  86. [86]
    Judge blocks Texas ESG, DEI proxy Law in Win for ISS, Glass Lewis
    Sep 2, 2025 · A federal judge blocked Texas's new proxy adviser law just days before it was set to take effect, siding with ISS and Glass Lewis in a First ...
  87. [87]
    Federal Court Halts Enforcement of Texas SB 2337 Regarding ...
    Sep 3, 2025 · Enacted earlier this year and scheduled to take effect September 1, SB 2337 would impose new disclosure obligations on proxy advisory firms ...
  88. [88]
    Western District of Texas Says NLRB Structure Unconstitutional ...
    Jul 26, 2024 · U.S. District Court Judge Alan Albright issued the injunction, finding that SpaceX was likely to succeed on the merits of its argument that ...
  89. [89]
    District Court Rules SpaceX Likely To Succeed in Challenging ...
    Aug 26, 2024 · The court's preliminary injunction halts the NLRB's administrative proceeding against SpaceX in a single case, and the NLRB has appealed this ...
  90. [90]
    Tracking Attacks on the NLRB: Texas Judge Endorses Constitutional ...
    Jul 25, 2024 · Judge Alan Albright of the Western District of Texas endorsed SpaceX's theory that removal protections for NLRB members and the agency's administrative law ...
  91. [91]
    NLRB Alert: Structure of NLRB Likely Unconstitutional per Federal ...
    Albright of the Western District of Texas issued an order stopping the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) from pursuing certain unfair labor practice ...Missing: ruling | Show results with:ruling
  92. [92]
    US judge blocks NLRB case against energy firm challenging ...
    Jul 29, 2024 · U.S. District Judge Alan Albright in Waco, Texas, earlier this month issued an injunction blocking an NLRB case from moving forward that ...
  93. [93]
    NLRB Act ruled unconstitutional by two judges in Texas
    Aug 9, 2024 · Both judges ruled the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) is unconstitutional. In July, each issued injunctions to stop the National Labor Relations Board ( ...
  94. [94]
    https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2992&context=facsch_lawrev
  95. [95]
    [PDF] Federal Judge Seeks Patent Cases
    Oct 22, 2021 · The figure below compares Judge Albright's median time to a claim construction decision and to trial with the two other federal judges with ...<|separator|>
  96. [96]
    In WDTX, the Numbers Tell the Story - Patent Progress
    Jan 20, 2023 · There were no new patent cases in Albright's court the following week and just one during the week of 7 August.” Meanwhile, during the week that ...Missing: growth | Show results with:growth
  97. [97]
    Senators slam Albright over 'extreme concentration' of patent cases
    Nov 3, 2021 · A bipartisan pair of US senators have accused US District Judge Alan Albright of misusing his power to make his Waco, Texas court a hotbed for patent ...
  98. [98]
    Judge Albright Invalidates Patents Under Alice for the First Time
    Jan 9, 2022 · Last month, Judge Albright issued two Alice rulings in which he invalidated the patents at issue for what appears to be the first time, ...
  99. [99]
    Judge Dodging: Apple loses Mandamus Transfer Action This Time
    Mar 21, 2024 · Judge Albright indicated his intention to deny the motion in December 2023 and Apple quickly filed a mandamus petition with the Federal Circuit, ...
  100. [100]
    “Clear Abuse of Discretion” Leads to New Venue Precedent
    Nov 30, 2023 · Judge Alan Albright, the sole judge in the Western District's Waco Division, actively courts patent infringement plaintiffs, promising expedited ...Missing: labor enforcement<|separator|>
  101. [101]
    Analysis Confirms that WDTX Judge Shopping Generated More ...
    Oct 30, 2023 · The researchers estimate that over a 33 month span, Judge Albright's appointment led to 880 cases being redirected to WDTX that would have ...<|separator|>
  102. [102]
    Apple Rebuked For Shoddy Venue Probe In Texas Transfer Dispute
    Sep 12, 2022 · West Texas Judge Alan Albright took Apple Inc. to task Friday for putting forward an “unreliable” and “evasive” expert to explain why a patent ...Missing: criticism | Show results with:criticism
  103. [103]
    Stronger patent protection and its effect on innovation and market ...
    Nov 28, 2024 · Firms with a higher exposure to stronger patent protection increased patenting, quality-adjusted patent counts, and R&D expenditure.Missing: enforcement | Show results with:enforcement
  104. [104]
    How do patents affect research investments? - PMC
    ... stronger patent laws result in increases in R&D investments as measured by patent filings. ... Patents and research investments: Assessing the empirical evidence.
  105. [105]
    Patents and Research Investments: Assessing the Empirical Evidence
    Article Information. Abstract. A well-developed theoretical literature--dating back at least to Nordhaus (1969)--has analyzed optimal patent policy design.<|separator|>
  106. [106]
    A Fresh Look at The Jury Data in Waco Patent Trials
    May 17, 2023 · We've now had a little over four years and seven months with Judge Albright at the helm of the Waco patent docket, enough time to see the ...Missing: disposition | Show results with:disposition
  107. [107]
    U.S. District Judge Alan Albright Grants First Two Section 101 Motions
    Apr 8, 2022 · Last December, he granted his first two motions under Section 101 of the Patent Act after denying many such motions during his first three years on the bench.
  108. [108]
    Cisco Secures Victory in $121M Patent Trial - IIPLA
    In a landmark decision, US District Judge Alan Albright ruled in favor of Cisco Systems Inc. at the conclusion of a $121 million patent infringement trial.
  109. [109]
    An empirical study based on the revision of the patent law
    This conditional relationship suggests that the positive externalities generated by stronger patent protection, such as increased R&D investment and ...
  110. [110]
    The Unintended Consequences of Randomizing Patent Case ...
    Mar 28, 2023 · Judge Albright shows unwillingness to stay cases, including motions to stay regarding PTAB (Patent Trial and Appeal Board) proceedings, the main ...