Centocor, Inc. et al v. Abbott Laboratories, 2-07-cv-00139
(TXED June 29, 2009, Verdict)
In denying defendants' motion to transfer venue for convenience, the court concluded that defendants failed to establish that the exercise of personal jurisdiction in the transferee forum would be proper. "[Defendant's] 'payment' of a single lease, filing of a corporate tax return, and employing eight people does not constitute 'continuous and systematic' contacts with [the transferee forum]." Moreover, "[defendant] cannot base its 'general jurisdiction' arguments on the [contacts in the transferee forum] held by other companies. Thus, the fact that [defendant] owns or does business with companies with contacts in [the transferee forum] (such as [other defendants]) does not allow it to rely on those contacts for jurisdictional purposes."
Chirife v. St. Jude Medical, Inc., 6-08-cv-00480
(TXED June 16, 2009, Memorandum Opinion & Order) (Davis, J.)
Defendants' motion for Rule 11 sanctions was denied where the court found that plaintiff's position on standing was "at least arguable. . . . Defendants also base their request for Rule 11 sanctions on their allegation that Plaintiff did not produce [a license] Agreement until nearly a year after the litigation commenced. We view this as a claim of discovery abuse, and it should have been raised before the Magistrate Judge."
Alfred E. Mann Foundation For Scientific Research v. Cochlear Corp., 2-07-cv-08108
(CACD May 29, 2009, Memorandum & Order) (King, J.)