There is a split between the Fifth and Ninth Circuits about whether a foreign manufacturer of a lithium battery falls within the specific personal jurisdiction of a state when its product is sold without authorization by a third party. Compare Ethridge v. Samsung SDI Co., 137 F.4th 309 (5th Cir. 2025) (yes), with Yamashita v.Continue reading “In Yet Another Case Involving an Exploding Lithium Battery, Seventh Circuit Joins Ninth Circuit and Splits with Fifth Circuit in Finding No Specific Personal Jurisdiction Over Manufacturer”
Tag Archives: Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2)
Sixth Circuit Holds That Placement of a Website Server in a State Does Not Automatically Expose Those Who Use It to Personal Jurisdiction There
In Carbone v. Kaal, No. 24-3795 (6th Cir. June 20, 2025), the Sixth Circuit affirms the dismissal of a tort action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2), holding that though the defendants allegedly transmitted defamatory statements through a server in Ohio, this fact alone did not support laying specific personal jurisdiction in that forum. “Robert Carbone,Continue reading “Sixth Circuit Holds That Placement of a Website Server in a State Does Not Automatically Expose Those Who Use It to Personal Jurisdiction There”
Divided Fifth Circuit Panel Splits with Ninth Circuit and Adopts a “Same Product Plus In-State Injury” Test of Relatedness for Personal Jurisdiction in a Product Liability Case
In Yamashita v. LG Chem, Ltd., 62 F.4th 496 (9th Cir. 2023), the Ninth Circuit held that a products liability case involving an exploding lithium battery did not “arise out of or relate to” the South Korean manufacturer’s contacts with the forum state for purposes of personal jurisdiction. (See March 6, 2023 post, Ninth CircuitContinue reading “Divided Fifth Circuit Panel Splits with Ninth Circuit and Adopts a “Same Product Plus In-State Injury” Test of Relatedness for Personal Jurisdiction in a Product Liability Case”
Sixth Circuit Adopts Narrower “Forum State” Approach to Nationwide Service of Process under 18 U.S.C. § 1965(b) of RICO Act, Joining Majority View in Circuit Split
In Peters Broadcast Eng’g, Inc. v. 24 Capital, LLC, No. 21-3849 (6th Cir. July 13, 2022), the Sixth Circuit joins six other circuits in holding that, for nationwide service of process under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1965, at least one defendant must be subject to personal jurisdiction inContinue reading “Sixth Circuit Adopts Narrower “Forum State” Approach to Nationwide Service of Process under 18 U.S.C. § 1965(b) of RICO Act, Joining Majority View in Circuit Split”
Panel Holds That Fourteenth Amendment Standards Constrain Fifth Amendment Personal Jurisdiction Over a Foreign Defendant, But Urges Reversal En Banc
Ed note 7-2-21: The Fifth Circuit vacated this opinion and will hear it en banc. https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/20/20-30382-CV1.pdf In Douglass v. Nippon Yusen Kabushiki Kaisha, No. 20-30379 (5th Cir. Apr. 30, 2021) (per curiam), the panel struggles with application of the federal due process personal jurisdiction test to a foreign defendant. While agreeing with the plaintiff inContinue reading “Panel Holds That Fourteenth Amendment Standards Constrain Fifth Amendment Personal Jurisdiction Over a Foreign Defendant, But Urges Reversal En Banc”
Failure to Appeal Post-Trial Personal Jurisdiction Ruling Forfeited Issue, Holds Eleventh Circuit
In Acrylicon USA, Inc. v. Silikal GmbH, No. 17-15737 (11th Cir. Jan. 26, 2021), the panel holds that while the defendant preserved a record of opposing personal jurisdiction at the pleadings and post-trial stages, it forfeited the argument on appeal by not appealing the post-trial ruling. Plaintiff AcryliCon USA (AC-USA) sued Silikal in federal districtContinue reading “Failure to Appeal Post-Trial Personal Jurisdiction Ruling Forfeited Issue, Holds Eleventh Circuit”
Paul Mollica's Federal Courts Blog 