Second Circuit Allows Securities Claims Against Crypto-Asset Exchange
In Morrison v. National Australia Bank (2010), the U.S. Supreme Court applied the presumption against extraterritoriality to § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act, holding that this provision applies only to transactions in the United States. Morrison’s transactional test has proven difficult to apply to unlisted securities that do not trade on an exchange. In…
Continue ReadingIt Is Harder Than It Looks to Sue State Sponsors of Terrorism
Rotem and Yoav Golan were injured in a 2015 terrorist attack in Israel when an assailant deliberately drove his car into a crowd of people. The Golans and their family sued Iran and Syria for various torts and for aiding and abetting a terrorist attack. Judge Trevor N. McFadden of the U.S. District Court for…
Continue ReadingChinese Judgments and Due Process: Another New York Decision
In the United States, the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments are generally governed by state law. Thirty-eight states and the District of Columbia have adopted either the 1962 Uniform Foreign Money Judgments Recognition Act or the updated 2005 Uniform Foreign Country Money Judgments Recognition Act. (In the remaining twelve states, common law governs.) Both…
Continue ReadingSuccessor Jurisdiction and Anti-Terrorism Litigation
Transnational litigation often presents tricky questions of personal jurisdiction. Ongoing litigation in New York arising out of rocket attacks by Hizbollah does so in spades. This post reviews the recent New York Court of Appeals decision in Lelchook v. Société Générale de Banque au Liban SAL, answering a certified question posed by the Second Circuit…
Continue ReadingAbitron on Remand
Last year, in Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc., the Supreme Court held that the federal trademark statute—known as the Lanham Act—applies only to domestic conduct infringing U.S. trademarks. A group of Austrian and German companies collectively known as “Abitron” placed U.S.-protected trademarks owned by a U.S. company, Hetronic, on products made in Europe. Some of…
Continue ReadingFederal Circuit Reconsiders Extraterritorial Patent Damages
The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Brumfield v. IBG LLC suggests that U.S. patent holders may be able to obtain damages for foreign activities that flow from domestic acts of infringement proscribed by 35 U.S.C. § 271(a). This is a new development: as the Federal Circuit explained, the Supreme Court’s extraterritoriality analysis in WesternGeco LLC…
Continue ReadingBread and Butter
There is a tendency when blogging to focus on cases that that are (1) important, (2) novel, (3) strange, or (4) wrong. These are the sorts of cases that most people—and, candidly, the TLB editors—find to be most interesting. (My colleague Bill Dodge may be an exception.) Every now and then, however, it is useful…
Continue ReadingAdditional Thoughts on Firexo
I have three thoughts to add to John Coyle’s insightful post on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit’s recent decision in Firexo, Inc. v. Firexo Group Limited: one on choice of law, one on jurisdiction, and one on forum selection. Choice of Law Even though the majority declines to apply the “closely…
Continue ReadingDistrict Court Permits Clean Air Act Action Against Canadian Company
The presumption against extraterritoriality is the principal tool that U.S. courts use to determine the reach of federal statutes. Last year, in Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc. (2023), the U.S. Supreme modified the presumption by requiring conduct relevant to a provision’s focus to occur in the United States in order for the application…
Continue ReadingThe Easy Way and the Hard Way
In the law, there are often two paths to a given destination. There is the easy way. And there is the hard way. In a recent New Jersey case involving a forum selection clause, the plaintiff was ultimately successful in defeating the defendant’s motion to dismiss. But man, oh man… did the plaintiff do it…
Continue Reading