Xilinx, Inc. v. Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG, No. 15-1919 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 15, 2017)

From the Opinion

The passage below is extracted verbatim from the opening of the document. It has not been editorially summarized — consult the full opinion for the court's complete reasoning.

Xilinx, Inc., (“Xilinx”) appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the N orthern District of California dismissing Xilinx’s declaratory judgment action against Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG (“Papst”) for lack of personal jurisdiction. Because we hold that the district court has specific personal jurisdiction over Papst with respect to Xilinx’s declaratory judgment action , we reverse and remand. B ACKGROUND Xilinx is a Delaware corporation that is headqua r- tered in San Jose, California.