From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tate Lyle Sucralose v. Hebei Sukeri Science

United States District Court, C.D. Illinois, Urbana Division
Nov 22, 2006
Case No. 06-2102 (C.D. Ill. Nov. 22, 2006)

Summary

holding that sales amounting to only .1% of defendant's total revenue not enough to merit general jurisdiction

Summary of this case from Richter v. Instar Enterprises Intern., Inc.

Opinion

Case No. 06-2102.

November 22, 2006


OPINION


A Report and Recommendation (#51) was filed by the Magistrate Judge in the above cause on November 3, 2006. More than ten (10) days have elapsed since the filing of the Recommendation and no objections have been made. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is, therefore, accepted by the court. See Video Views, Inc. v. Studio 21, Ltd., 797 F.2d 538 (7th Cir. 1986). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

(1) Defendant MTC Industries' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Improper Venue (#12) is GRANTED. Defendant MTC Industries is terminated as a party to this action.

(2) This case is referred to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.


Summaries of

Tate Lyle Sucralose v. Hebei Sukeri Science

United States District Court, C.D. Illinois, Urbana Division
Nov 22, 2006
Case No. 06-2102 (C.D. Ill. Nov. 22, 2006)

holding that sales amounting to only .1% of defendant's total revenue not enough to merit general jurisdiction

Summary of this case from Richter v. Instar Enterprises Intern., Inc.
Case details for

Tate Lyle Sucralose v. Hebei Sukeri Science

Case Details

Full title:TATE LYLE SUCRALOSE, INC., Plaintiff, v. HEBEI SUKERI SCIENCE AND…

Court:United States District Court, C.D. Illinois, Urbana Division

Date published: Nov 22, 2006

Citations

Case No. 06-2102 (C.D. Ill. Nov. 22, 2006)

Citing Cases

Richter v. Instar Enterprises Intern., Inc.

Where a defendant's sales in a state represent both a small percentage of a defendant's total sales and a…