The World in U.S. Courts: Winter 2018 - Personal Jurisdiction/Forum Non Conveniens | December.18.2017
This patent infringement action, apparently related to the 3G Licensing case discussed above, considered among other issues whether specific personal jurisdiction could be asserted over Kyocera, a Japanese corporation. The District Court in Delaware stated that jurisdiction could be shown under what it termed the “dual jurisdiction” or “stream of commerce” theory, which requires that a plaintiff show (i) that the defendant intended to serve the Delaware market specifically; (ii) that this intent resulted in the introduction of the product into the market; and (iii) that the plaintiff’s cause of action arises from injuries caused by that product. The Court focused on the first prong of this test, and found that it was satisfied by statements in Kyocera’s annual report that it “develops, manufactures and sells mobile phones such as smartphones ... mainly for telecommunications carriers,” including carriers that are incorporated in Delaware. No other relevant facts were cited.
[Editor’s note: The Koninklijke case is also discussed in the Intellectual Property-Patents section of this report, as certain courts apply special personal jurisdiction standards in patent infringement cases.]RETURN TO Winter 2018 Edition