§Why CasetextPricing

On Semiconductor Corporation et al v. Power Integrations Incorporated

MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction & Improper Venue or, in the Alternative, MOTION to Change Venue/Transfer Case to Northern Dist. of California

25 Cited authorities

  1. Helicopteros Nacionales de Colom. v. Hall

    466 U.S. 408 (1984)   Cited 9,403 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “purchases, even if occurring at regular intervals” were insufficient to establish general personal jurisdiction over a nonresident corporation

  2. Jones v. GNC Franchising, Inc.

    211 F.3d 495 (9th Cir. 2000)   Cited 1,628 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding the same in context of forum-selection-clause prohibition in California's franchise statute

  3. Rio Properties, Inc. v. Rio Intern. Interlink

    284 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir. 2002)   Cited 1,502 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding website-operator defendant's magazine advertisements supported the exercise of jurisdiction where defendant also ran local radio advertisements

  4. Avocent Huntsville Corp. v. Aten Int’l Co.

    552 F.3d 1324 (Fed. Cir. 2009)   Cited 381 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "letters threatening suit for patent infringement sent to the alleged infringer by themselves do not suffice to create personal jurisdiction"

  5. Red Wing Shoe Co. v. Hockerson-Halberstadt

    148 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 1998)   Cited 513 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "patentee [does] not subject itself to personal jurisdiction in a forum solely by informing a party who happens to be located there of suspected infringement," as "[grounding personal jurisdiction on such contacts alone would not comport with principles of fairness."

  6. Fourco Glass Co. v. Transmirra Corp.

    353 U.S. 222 (1957)   Cited 547 times   86 Legal Analyses
    Holding section 1391(c) did not define a corporate defendant's residence under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) applicable to patent infringement suits

  7. Beverly Hills Fan Co. v. Royal Sovereign Corp.

    21 F.3d 1558 (Fed. Cir. 1994)   Cited 569 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the forum's interest in discouraging injuries within its territory extends to patent infringement actions

  8. Digi-Tel Holdings, Inc. v. Proteq Telecomm

    89 F.3d 519 (8th Cir. 1996)   Cited 493 times
    Holding that "dozens of letters and faxes and numerous phone calls" alone did not establish personal jurisdiction

  9. Action Embroidery v. Atl. Embroidery

    368 F.3d 1174 (9th Cir. 2004)   Cited 381 times
    Holding that, "under Section 12 of the Clayton Act, the existence of personal jurisdiction over an antitrust defendant does not depend upon there being proper venue in that court"

  10. Autogenomics, Inc. v. Oxford Gene Technology Ltd.

    566 F.3d 1012 (Fed. Cir. 2009)   Cited 298 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding defendant's attendance at three scientific conferences/trade shows in the forum state insufficient to establish personal jurisdiction

  11. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 356,916 times   947 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Section 1404 - Change of venue

    28 U.S.C. § 1404   Cited 28,985 times   191 Legal Analyses
    Granting Class Plaintiffs' motion to transfer action in order to "facilitate a unified settlement approval process together with the class action cases in" In re Amex ASR

  13. Section 1391 - Venue generally

    28 U.S.C. § 1391   Cited 28,738 times   199 Legal Analyses
    Finding that venue lies where a "substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred

  14. Section 1400 - Patents and copyrights, mask works, and designs

    28 U.S.C. § 1400   Cited 2,191 times   321 Legal Analyses
    Identifying proper venue for copyright and patent suits