In this BNA Insight, attorney Paul Ragusa examines the impact of a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision on litigation involving foreign corporations and abbreviated new drug applications. He says it may become more challenging to assert general jurisdiction over foreign and out-of-state corporations in states that are not the corporation’s principal place of business or state of incorporation.
When can personal jurisdiction be properly asserted against a foreign corporation based on the general local activities of its subsidiary in the forum state? In an opinion authored by Justice Ginsberg, the Supreme Court recently considered this and other questions in Daimler AG v. Bauman, and overturned a lower court’s decision that held a parent corporation subject to general jurisdiction in a state based on the in-state contacts of its subsidiary.
Originally published in Pharmaceutical Law & Industry Report, 12 PLIR 721, 05/16/2014.
Please see full article below for more information.
Firefox recommends the PDF Plugin for Mac OS X for viewing PDF documents in your browser.
We can also show you Legal Updates using the Google Viewer; however, you will need to be logged into Google Docs to view them.
Please choose one of the above to proceed!
LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.
Topics: ANDA, DaimlerChrysler v Bauman, Drug Manufacturers, Foreign Corporations, Foreign Subsidiaries, Forum Selection Clause, Forum State, Patent Litigation, Patents, Personal Jurisdiction, Pharmaceutical, SCOTUS, Subsidiaries
Published In: Civil Procedure Updates, General Business Updates, Intellectual Property Updates, International Trade Updates, Science, Computers & Technology Updates
DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.
© Baker Botts | Attorney Advertising