In Raytheon, Judge Gilstrap articulated a four factor test for determination of whether a defendant has a regular and established place of business in the district for venue purposes. The four factors are: (1) physical presence; (2) the extent to which the defendant represents, internally or externally, that it has a presence in the district; (3) the extent to which a defendant derives benefits from its presence in the district, including but not limited to sales revenue; and (4) extent to which the defendant interacts in a targeted way with existing or potential customers, consumers, users, or entities within the district.
Judge Gilstrap's venue decision was harshly criticized by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) as a "reprehensible" end-run around the Supreme Court's TC Heartland.