38 Cited authorities

Daimler AG v. Bauman
571 U.S. 117 (2014) Cited 5,585 times 236 Legal Analyses
Holding that foreign corporations may not be subject to general jurisdiction "whenever they have an in-state subsidiary or affiliate"
Goodyear Dunlop Tires Oper. v. Brown
564 U.S. 915 (2011) Cited 5,176 times 86 Legal Analyses
Holding "the sales of petitioners' tires sporadically made in North Carolina through intermediaries" insufficient to support general jurisdiction
Atl. Marine Constr. Co. v. U.S. Dist. Court for the W. Dist. of Tex.
571 U.S. 49 (2013) Cited 3,640 times 39 Legal Analyses
Holding that the correct procedural mechanism for enforcement of an FSC specifying a foreign forum is through a motion to dismiss for FNC
Int'l Shoe Co. v. Washington
326 U.S. 310 (1945) Cited 22,543 times 109 Legal Analyses
Holding that states may exercise personal jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants with "certain minimum contacts with [the forum] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend ‘traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice’ " (quoting Milliken v. Meyer , 311 U.S. 457, 463, 61 S.Ct. 339, 85 L.Ed. 278 (1940) )
O'Connor v. Sandy Lane
496 F.3d 312 (3d Cir. 2007) Cited 1,123 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding a vacation company purposefully contacted Pennsylvania by mailing brochures and calling Pennsylvania residents
Perkins v. Benguet Mining Co.
342 U.S. 437 (1952) Cited 1,816 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding Ohio courts could exercise general jurisdiction over a foreign corporation due to the extent and nature of the temporary operations in the state, finding such business activity was continuous and systematic
Remick v. Manfredy
238 F.3d 248 (3d Cir. 2001) Cited 718 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding distribution of defamatory letter to "the boxing community" did not support personal jurisdiction where forum state lacked "unique relationship with the boxing industry, as distinguished from the relationship in Calder between California and the motion picture industry"
Gulf Ins. Co. v. Glasbrenner
417 F.3d 353 (2d Cir. 2005) Cited 460 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding venue improper unless "significant events or omissions material to the plaintiff's claim . . . occurred in the district in question, even if other material events occurred elsewhere"
Sonera Holding B.V. v. Çukurova Holding A.S.
750 F.3d 221 (2d Cir. 2014) Cited 244 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a corporation's contacts with New York did not “come close to making it ‘at home' there” even though the corporation solicited business from two New York-based funds, among other contacts that the corporation had with New York
Fc Inv. Grp. Lc v. IFX Mkts., Ltd.
529 F.3d 1087 (D.C. Cir. 2008) Cited 251 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that allegations that only establish a business relationship between defendants—without demonstrating any further evidence of a conspiracy—failed to establish personal jurisdiction
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 344,399 times 920 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Section 1391 - Venue generally
28 U.S.C. § 1391 Cited 27,672 times 197 Legal Analyses
Finding that venue lies where a "substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred
Section 1406 - Cure or waiver of defects
28 U.S.C. § 1406 Cited 14,052 times 52 Legal Analyses
Recognizing that transfer is proper to any district or division in which the action could have been brought
Section 13-423 - Personal jurisdiction based upon conduct
D.C. Code § 13-423 Cited 655 times
Authorizing jurisdiction over a person, who acts directly or by an agent

Wilder et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al

38 Cited authorities

Holding that foreign corporations may not be subject to general jurisdiction "whenever they have an in-state subsidiary or affiliate"

Holding "the sales of petitioners' tires sporadically made in North Carolina through intermediaries" insufficient to support general jurisdiction

Holding that the correct procedural mechanism for enforcement of an FSC specifying a foreign forum is through a motion to dismiss for FNC

Holding a vacation company purposefully contacted Pennsylvania by mailing brochures and calling Pennsylvania residents

Holding Ohio courts could exercise general jurisdiction over a foreign corporation due to the extent and nature of the temporary operations in the state, finding such business activity was continuous and systematic

Holding distribution of defamatory letter to "the boxing community" did not support personal jurisdiction where forum state lacked "unique relationship with the boxing industry, as distinguished from the relationship in Calder between California and the motion picture industry"

Holding venue improper unless "significant events or omissions material to the plaintiff's claim . . . occurred in the district in question, even if other material events occurred elsewhere"

Holding that a corporation's contacts with New York did not “come close to making it ‘at home' there” even though the corporation solicited business from two New York-based funds, among other contacts that the corporation had with New York

Holding that allegations that only establish a business relationship between defendants—without demonstrating any further evidence of a conspiracy—failed to establish personal jurisdiction

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Finding that venue lies where a "substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred

Recognizing that transfer is proper to any district or division in which the action could have been brought

Authorizing jurisdiction over a person, who acts directly or by an agent