Legal News Headlines

Case Summaries

Commercial Law

[05/21] Bombardier Recreational Products, Inc. v. Dow Chemical Canada
The trial court properly quashed the service of summons for lack of personal jurisdiction in an action for indemnity for personal injury damages, where: 1) mere foreseeability, at least where products are not sold in a state as part of the regular and anticipated flow of commerce into that state, is not enough to establish minimum contacts with the forum state; and 2) cross-defendant, a Canadian company, was not subject to personal jurisdiction in California because it did not purposefully avail itself of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum state.

[05/20] Yangzhou Bestpak Gifts v. US
Judgment of the U.S. Court of International Trade sustaining the U.S. Department of Commerce's calculation of plaintiff's separate rate margin regarding its importation of narrow woven ribbons from China, is vacated and remanded, where substantial evidence does not support the rate used.

[05/16] Forrester Environmental v. Wheelabrator Technologies
Summary judgment for defendant on plaintiff's state law business tort claims is vacated and remanded, where the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiffs' claims because: 1) defendant's allegedly inaccurate statements regarding its patent rights concerned conduct taking place entirely in Taiwan; 2) the use of a patented process outside the United States is not an act of patent infringement; and thus, 3) there is no prospect of a future U.S. infringement suit arising out of the Taiwan company's use of the parties' products in Taiwan, and accordingly no prospect of inconsistent judgments between state and federal courts.

[05/13] Dan’s City Used Cars, Inc. v. Pelkey
State-law claims stemming from the storage and disposal of a car, once towing has ended, are not sufficiently connected to a motor carrier's service with respect to the transportation of property to warrant pre- emption under Section 14501(c)(1) of the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act, where: 1) plaintiff's state law Consumer Protection Act and negligence claims are not related to the movement of his car; 2) plaintiff seeks redress only for conduct occurring after the car ceased moving and was stored; and 3) plaintiff's claims are also unrelated to a "service" a motor carrier renders its customers.

[05/13] Motiva, LLC v. International Trade Commission
In action in which plaintiff alleged that Nintendo's Wii infringed its patents, and Nintendo's selling and importation of the Wii in the United States violated section 337 of the Tariff Act, the decision of the International Trade Commission that Nintendo did not violate section 337 is affirmed, where: 1) substantial evidence supports the Commission's finding that plaintiff's litigation against Nintendo was not an investment in commercializing plaintiff's patented technology that would develop a licensing program to encourage adoption and development of articles that incorporated plaintiff's patented technology; and 2) the Commission properly determined that a domestic industry does not exist nor is in the process of being established for plaintiff's patents.

Read More