June 5, 2022
Managing Intellectual Property
On June 26, 2017, the ruling in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods established that the venue for patent cases had to be where defendants were incorporated or had regular and established places of business. The ruling adjusted the number of case filings in certain districts due to higher numbers of established places of business. After five years of the change in venue rule, some patent practitioners argue that the patent venue law is established. Finnegan partner James Barney noted that companies may have more nuance in whether a franchise constitutes an established place of business.
James explained that the analysis in the case of franchises would depend on the details of the franchise agreement. Different contact agreements could lead to different conclusions on venue. He added that courts will need to address venue-related disputes on a case-by-case basis, stating, “As each of these fact patterns gets resolved, that will provide more clarity.”
Read “Patent Venue Still Unsettled Five Years After TC Heartland″
Commentary
PTAB Filings Down 81% in Q2 2026 as Patent Challengers Abandon IPR Playbook
July 13, 2026
Award/Ranking
Best Lawyers in Germany Recognizes Dr. Dr. Jochen Herr in Recent Rankings
July 16, 2026
Commentary
Patent Strategy Could Shape Financing, Valuation and Risk in Offshore Energy Projects
June 30, 2026
Award/Ranking
Finnegan’s European Practices and Attorneys Highlighted in 2026 Managing IP Rankings
June 25, 2026
Press Release
BMW Obtains Preliminary Injunction Against Zync; Federal Court Orders Zync to Halt ITC Trade Secret
June 23, 2026
Award/Ranking
Six Finnegan Partners Recognized in the 2026 Lawdragon 500 Leading Global IP Lawyers
June 22, 2026
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.