Cargill, Inc. v. F. Hoffman-LaRoche Ltd.
District Court, District of Columbia
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION Re: Bronnimann Motions
THOMAS F. HOGAN, District Judge.
Pending before the Court are defendant Roland Bronnimann’s (“Bronnimann”) Motion to Dismiss the Cargill complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction and the Car-gill plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Roland *64Bronnimann’s testimony.1 Upon careful consideration of the parties’ briefs, the oral arguments presented at the September 13, 2000 hearing, and the entire record herein, this Court will deny the Motion to Compel and defer ruling on the Motion to Dismiss pending further jurisdictional discovery.
I. BACKGROUND
Roland Bronnimann…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Baxter v. PalmigianoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Rogers v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Mitchell v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Gentile v. State Bar of Nev.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- GTE New Media Services Inc. v. BellSouth Corp.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2000
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- In Re Vitamins Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2000