Associate
Jonathan Fagan focuses on intellectual property litigation, licensing, and client counseling in a wide variety of technologies. He represents clients at both trial and appellate levels and knows how to keep the big picture in mind while immersed in the case details. He enjoys working closely with clients to understand their needs and develop effective business and legal strategies.
Jonathan is involved in cases at all stages of litigation—from pre-complaint investigation to appeal. He appears in court, conducts depositions, drafts briefs, and prepares expert and fact witnesses to testify. Beyond his litigation practice, Jonathan works with clients to develop licensing strategies, performs due diligence related to intellectual-property portfolios, advises clients on strategies for leveraging trademark rights to combat counterfeit goods, and obtains opinions on patent infringement.
Prior to his legal career, Jonathan worked as a mechanical engineer within the automotive part manufacturing industry. He has built upon this experience by exercising a genuine curiosity to learn about the technical subject matter of client's products and how the innovation aligns with their business goals.
Jonathan has been recognized on the Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll.
Certain Road Construction Machines and Components Thereof
337-TA-1088, ITC, Judge Lord
Nissei ASB Co., et al. v. R&D Tool & Engineering Co.
Successfully represented Nissei ASB in a patent infringement, breach of contract, tortious interference with business relations, and trade secret misappropriation litigation related to blow mold machines used to manufacture containers for consumer product packaging.
4:19-cv-00042, W.D. Mo., Judge Kays
Carrum Technologies, LLC v. BMW of North America, LLC, et al.
Obtained complete victory against Carrum on appeal of the District of Delaware’s claim construction to the Federal Circuit following Carrum’s stipulation of non-infringement under the claim construction, thereby exonerating BMW’s ACC system, first sold in 2000, against Carrum’s 2004 patents. Invalidated several asserted claims through post-grant efforts before the U.S. Patent Office, including IPRs and EPRs, and pursued claims through proceedings before the Eastern District of Virginia to vindicate BMW’s patent challenges.
1:18-cv-01645, D. Del., Judge Andrews
21-1435, 24-1480, Fed. Cir., Judges Clevenger, Cunningham, Lourie, Moore, Prost, Taranto
IPR2019-00902, -00903, -00904, -00905, -00927, 00928, PTAB, Judges Browne, Scanlon, Tornquist
90/019,010, CRU
At the PTAB Blog
Claim Construction Can Be Determinative! Claim Construction Can Be Determinative!
December 22, 2022
INCONTESTABLE® Blog
Data Scraping Claims: CFAA Out, Contract and Copyright In? Data Scraping Claims: CFAA Out, Contract and Copyright In?
March 17, 2022
Articles
ITC Basics: What Makes the ITC a Unique and Desirable Forum ITC Basics: What Makes the ITC a Unique and Desirable Forum
September/October 2019
IP LitigatorINCONTESTABLE® Blog
Infringement Plagues Pharaoh’s Fortune Infringement Plagues Pharaoh’s Fortune
May 8, 2019
Federal Circuit IP Blog
Infringement Enforcement Letters Can Subject Sender to DJ Jurisdiction and Venue Infringement Enforcement Letters Can Subject Sender to DJ Jurisdiction and Venue
December 19, 2018
Press Release
Seven-Year Legal Battle Concludes with BMW’s Victory Over Carrum Technologies Seven-Year Legal Battle Concludes with BMW’s Victory Over Carrum Technologies
October 15, 2025
Award/Ranking
60 Finnegan Attorneys Named to 2023 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll 60 Finnegan Attorneys Named to 2023 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll
May 15, 2024
Press Release
48 Finnegan Attorneys Named to 2017 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll 48 Finnegan Attorneys Named to 2017 Capital Pro Bono Honor Roll
February 20, 2018
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.