Judge Who Axed Texas Book Ban Is Best Known for Patent Caseload

Judge Alan D. Albright, who ruled this week against a Texas censorship law, had already made a name for himself for refusing to let go of patent cases, which led to congressional blowback and a change in court policy.

Albright, who sits on the US District Court for the Western District of Texas in Waco, struck down a state law that would have required book sellers to label books sold to public schools with sexual content ratings and recall any already-sold books considered “sexually explicit.” The law, known as HB 900, was passed by the Republican-led Texas state legislature and signed by Gov. Greg Abbott (R) earlier this year.

Albright, an appointee of former President Donald Trump best known for his dominant role in patent litigation, concluded that the law violated free speech protections, saying in a 59-page opinion Sept. 18 that the statute constituted “textbook compelled speech.”

The judge didn’t mince words in his rebuke of the Texas law, which he said would impose requirements on book sellers that are “so numerous and onerous as to call into question whether the legislature believed any third party could possibly comply.”

He also chided the state’s attorneys for appearing, at a court hearing, “confused and unaware of how the law would actually function in practice, even though the hearing was mere days before it would go into effect.”

With patent litigation often leading to settlements, the censorship ruling offers a relatively rare glimpse into Albright’s decision-writing style in a civil case outside of the intellectual property space, according to Paul R. Gugliuzza, a professor at Temple University’s Beasley School of Law.

Albright has developed a reputation for being friendly to patent-holders because he is reluctant to wipe out patents in the early stages of litigation, Gugliuzza said. But he said it’s difficult to evaluate a judge’s political ideology based on his decisions in patent cases.

Still, Gugliuzza said Albright is a “pretty traditional Texas Republican” who doesn’t espouse far-right ideology, despite the leanings of the president who appointed him. He also described him as a well-respected judge among patent litigators who is “pretty confident in his views.”

“I think you might see a general disposition reflected in the book case order, where he’s like, ‘I’m going to like call this for what it is because it’s what I do as a judge,’” Gugliuzza said. “It’s like, ‘I have a problem. I’m going to spend 59 pages telling you why.’”

A former patent litigator himself, Albright drew criticism earlier in his time on the bench holding a disproportionate share of patent cases filed. At one point, the judge was handling a quarter of the nation’s patent litigation.

Albright’s refusal to grant requests to transfer certain cases earned him rebukes from the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which has jurisdiction over patent cases.

His actions also drew scrutiny from Congress.

Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) wrote a letter to Chief Justice John Roberts in 2021 expressing concerns about forum-shopping, or the practice where patent holders would deliberately file in Albright’s court to ensure they would be assigned him as a judge. Roberts then asked the Judicial Conference, the policy arm of the federal court system, to review the issue.

In July 2022, the chief judge of the Western District of Texas ordered that lawsuits be equally distributed among all judges on the court. Since then, the number of patent cases filed in that court has declined somewhat, though Albright still manages a significant share.

Albright was nominated to serve as a district judge in 2018 and was confirmed by the Senate via voice vote. He previously worked in private practice and served as a US magistrate judge in the Western District between 1992 and 1999.