In New World International, Inc. v. Ford Global Technologies, LLC, [2016-2097](June 8, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of New World’s\u00a0declaratory\u00a0judgment complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction over\u00a0Ford Global Technologies (FGTL).<\/p>\n
FGTL sent New World a cease\u00a0and desist letter accusing New World of infringing its\u00a0design patents by selling various parts meant for\u00a0use on Ford vehicles. \u00a0New World filed suit in\u00a0the Northern District of Texas seeking a declaratory\u00a0judgment of noninfringement and invalidity with regard\u00a0to the design patents. \u00a0The district court found that FGTL\u2019s cease and desist\u00a0letters sent to New World in Texas were not sufficient to\u00a0establish jurisdiction over FGTL. The court further found that FGTL\u2019s license agreement with third party LKQ did not provide the court with specific\u00a0personal jurisdiction over FGTL in the declaratory judgment\u00a0suit, and the court accordingly dismissed the complaint.<\/p>\n
The Federal Circuit applied its three part test, which considers:\u00a0(1) whether the defendant\u00a0purposefully directed its activities at residents of the\u00a0forum; (2) whether the claim arises out of or relates to the defendant\u2019s activities with the forum; and (3) whether\u00a0assertion of personal jurisdiction is reasonable and fair. \u00a0The Federal Circuit\u00a0has\u00a0acknowledged that the defendant purposefully directs his\u00a0activities at residents of the forum when the defendant sends a cease and desist letter to a potential plaintiff in\u00a0that particular forum. And a subsequent declaratory\u00a0judgment action by that potential plaintiff arises out of\u00a0or relates to the defendant\u2019s activity\u2014namely, the cease\u00a0and desist letter. However, under the third part of the test, however,
\nthis court has held that it is improper to predicate\u00a0personal jurisdiction on the act of sending ordinary cease\u00a0and desist letters into a forum, without more.<\/p>\n
The Federal Circuit noted that\u00a0while the act of sending cease and desist letters is insufficient\u00a0by itself to trigger a finding of personal jurisdiction,\u00a0other activities by the defendant, in conjunction with\u00a0cease and desist letters, may be sufficient. However, the Federal Circuit found no other activities of FGTL sufficient to establish jurisdiction.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In New World International, Inc. v. Ford Global Technologies, LLC, [2016-2097](June 8, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of New World’s\u00a0declaratory\u00a0judgment complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction over\u00a0Ford Global Technologies (FGTL). FGTL sent New World a cease\u00a0and desist letter … Continue reading