Legal Opinion
Polar Electro Oy v. Suunto Oy
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided July 20, 2016No. 2015-1930PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LOURIE, Circuit Judge.
Polar Electro Oy (“Polar”) appeals from the decision of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware granting Suunto Oy’s (“Suunto”) motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. See Polar Electro Oy v. Suunto Oy, No. 11-1100, 2015 WL 2248439 (D. Del. May 12, 2015). Because the district court erred in determining that Suunto lacked sufficient minimum contacts with Delaware to support specific jurisdiction, we vacate and remand.
BACKGROUND
Polar, a Finnish company based in Finland, owns U.S. Patents 5,611,346 and 6,537,227, directed to a method and…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., Solano Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Marks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Regenlab U.S. LLC v. Estar Techs. Ltd.District Court, S.D. Illinois · 2018
- XMission, LC v. PureHealth ResearchCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2024
- Susan McKnight, Inc. v. United Industries Corp.District Court, W.D. Tennessee · 2017
- Realtime Data, LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc.District Court, E.D. Texas · 2013
- 3G Licensing, S.A. v. Lenovo Holding Co., Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 2019
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.