Written by :
Published on :
U.S. District Court applies Supreme Court’s Daimler v. Bauman ruling to narrowly define general jurisdiction
WASHINGTON - A federal court has dismissed a trademark infringement lawsuit against a foreign internet poker news site in a ruling that signifies a win for Internet businesses at large by narrowing the types of contacts that would confer general jurisdiction against these foreign companies.
In a June 4 ruling in the U.S. District Court, District of Nevada, Judge Robert C. Jones granted iBus Media Holdings’ motion for dismissal of Best Odds Corp.’s trademark infringement lawsuit. Judge Jones said the plaintiff failed to make a case that Nevada courts had general jurisdiction over the foreign-based iBus Media, citing the Supreme Court’s recent Daimler AG v. Bauman decision, which “clarified that the reach of general jurisdiction is narrower than had been supposed in lower courts for many years.”
Under the Daimler ruling, Judge Jones concluded that it’s not enough for plaintiffs to show that a foreign defendant merely conducts business in a forum state. Instead, they must demonstrate that defendant’s “contacts are so pervasive as to render the defendant ‘essentially at home’ in the forum state.”
“This dismissal is one of the first cases we’ve seen where the Supreme Court’s Daimler ruling has begun to set a new precedent,” said interactive gaming attorney Jeff Ifrah, founder of Ifrah Law, which defended iBus Media in the lawsuit. “This ruling will make it much more difficult for plaintiffs to sue internet companies based on general jurisdiction.”
Dueling online poker news sites
Nevada-based Best Odds Corp. sued the Isle of Man-based iBus Media Holdings for infringement of its MacPoker ® trademark, claiming that the Nevada courts had general jurisdiction over iBus Media’s poker news sites. Best Odds pointed to the defendants’ media kit, which stated, “While the global site has the largest traffic reach, with significant U.S. presence, PokerNews is an international force with over 30 sub-domains, each with localized language and content.”
The court disagreed that these statements conferred general jurisdiction over iBus Media. “..[T]he exhibits Plaintiff has attached to its complaint provide little support for the majority of these allegations,” Judge Jones wrote, noting that the media kit stressed repeatedly the international focus of the PokerNews site, which he also deemed to be a “passive news site” that had little interactivity with site visitors. Judge Jones also noted that screenshots of the PokerNews website submitted by Best Odds featured links that were clearly labeled “Not Accepting U.S. Players.”
“The court basically took the plaintiff’s exhibits and turned them against them,” Ifrah Law attorney Rachel Hirsch said. “Plaintiff essentially argued that as global websites, defendants would naturally do some business in the United States, and that should be enough for the Ninth Circuit to have jurisdiction. But using the Daimler ruling, the court said that’s not enough.”
The court’s narrowing of general jurisdiction will likely be a boon to foreign-based corporations, Hirsch said.
“Foreign defendants aren’t going to be hauled into U.S. courts so easily,” she said. “It’s going to be much harder for plaintiffs to prove that a foreign company is ‘essentially at home’ in the U.S.”
The case is Best Odds Corp. vs iBus Media Limited, docket number 2:13-cv-020080RCJ-VCF.
