14 Cited authorities

ISI Brands, Inc. v. KCC International, Inc.
458 F. Supp. 2d 81 (E.D.N.Y. 2006) Cited 51 times
Denying jurisdictional discovery where plaintiff could only speculate that defendant sold additional products in forum via its website that might establish jurisdiction
American Network, Inc. v. Access America/Connect Atlanta, Inc.
975 F. Supp. 494 (S.D.N.Y. 1997) Cited 59 times
Holding that when defendant published the statements on its home page that it can help customers "across the U.S.," it was foreseeable that it might be haled into court to defend itself in a jurisdiction where it secured customers and sent them materials, provided services to them, and received payment from them
PEARSON EDUCATION, INC. v. SHI
525 F. Supp. 2d 551 (S.D.N.Y. 2007) Cited 32 times
Holding that plaintiffs' allegations that defendants consummated multiple sales of their copyrighted books with New York customers through the Internet constituted an adequate showing of defendants' purposeful contacts with New York
Ronar, Inc. v. Wallace
649 F. Supp. 310 (S.D.N.Y. 1986) Cited 63 times
Holding that there was no personal jurisdiction under CPLR § 302 over an individual earning $6,500 from international commerce because he should not be "called upon to bear the expense and inconvenience of litigating in a distant forum"
PDK Labs, Inc. v. Proactive Labs, Inc.
325 F. Supp. 2d 176 (E.D.N.Y. 2004) Cited 25 times
Case No. 03-CV-772 (FB). July 15, 2004 J. CHRISTOPHER JENSEN, ESQ., Cowan, Liebowtiz Latman, P.C., New York, for the Plaintiff. A. TODD MEROLLA, ESQ., Raiford Dixon LLP, Atlanta, GA, for the Defendant. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER FREDERIC BLOCK, District Judge Plaintiff PDK Labs, Inc. ("PDK") brought this action alleging trademark and trade dress infringement of its registered trademarks for "Two-Way" and "Maxbrand" in the marketing of its over-the-counter bronchodilator medicine, along with related claims
Hamilton v. Accu-Tek
32 F. Supp. 2d 47 (E.D.N.Y. 1998) Cited 26 times
Finding that an advertisement in a national trade magazine was not a "particularly weighty" contact with the forum state
Jones v. Hirschfeld
348 F. Supp. 2d 50 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) Cited 18 times
Holding that "the Court's expressions of irritation toward the defendant and his lawyer" were insufficient to merit recusal, and instead were appropriate "admonishments to the defendant to take the case seriously and cease his haphazard behavior"
Starmedia Network, Inc. v. Star Media Inc.
00 CIV. 4647 (DLC) (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 23, 2001) Cited 20 times
Finding that moderately interactive website implied that defendant had "used its website to attract and service business across the nation, including in New York," and that defendant therefore "should have reasonably expected that its [out-of-state tortious act] would have consequences in New York"
Launer v. Buena Vista Winery, Inc.
916 F. Supp. 204 (E.D.N.Y. 1996) Cited 26 times
Finding that despite the fact that plaintiff was a resident of New Jersey, the defendants were residents of California, and many of the discriminatory acts against plaintiff were made in California, the fact that certain acts occurred in New York City and plaintiff's actual firing occurred in New York City meant the case could proceed
Cenage Learning, Inc. v. Buckeye Books
531 F. Supp. 2d 596 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) Cited 13 times
Finding that when defendants are "separate entities and are presumptively entitled to have independent existence," plaintiff must establish a basis for subjecting each of them, individually to the jurisdiction of the court
Section 302 - Personal jurisdiction by acts of non-domiciliaries
N.Y. CPLR 302 Cited 4,201 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that service may be made "to a person of suitable age and discretion at the actual place of business, dwelling place or usual place of abode of the person to be served and by ... mailing the summons to the person to be served at his or her last known residence"

Energy Brands Inc. v. Spiritual Brands, Inc. et al

14 Cited authorities

Denying jurisdictional discovery where plaintiff could only speculate that defendant sold additional products in forum via its website that might establish jurisdiction

Holding that plaintiffs' allegations that defendants consummated multiple sales of their copyrighted books with New York customers through the Internet constituted an adequate showing of defendants' purposeful contacts with New York

Holding that there was no personal jurisdiction under CPLR § 302 over an individual earning $6,500 from international commerce because he should not be "called upon to bear the expense and inconvenience of litigating in a distant forum"

Finding that an advertisement in a national trade magazine was not a "particularly weighty" contact with the forum state

Holding that "the Court's expressions of irritation toward the defendant and his lawyer" were insufficient to merit recusal, and instead were appropriate "admonishments to the defendant to take the case seriously and cease his haphazard behavior"

Finding that moderately interactive website implied that defendant had "used its website to attract and service business across the nation, including in New York," and that defendant therefore "should have reasonably expected that its [out-of-state tortious act] would have consequences in New York"

Finding that when defendants are "separate entities and are presumptively entitled to have independent existence," plaintiff must establish a basis for subjecting each of them, individually to the jurisdiction of the court

Holding that service may be made "to a person of suitable age and discretion at the actual place of business, dwelling place or usual place of abode of the person to be served and by ... mailing the summons to the person to be served at his or her last known residence"