Legal Opinion

D & S SCREEN FUND II v. Ferrari

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided November 21, 2001No. 2:01-cv-04333PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

JOYNER, District Judge.

By way of the motion now pending before this Court, the defendant, Emilio Ferrari, a/k/a Aman Bedi and Aman Ferrari Bedi, moves to dismiss the plaintiffs complaint against him on the grounds that this Court lacks personal jurisdiction or, alternatively to quash subpoena and transfer venue. For the reasons set forth below, the motion to dismiss for lack of in personam jurisdiction shall be granted.

Factual Background

According to the averments contained in Plaintiffs complaint, this is an action for copyright infringement under the Copyright Act of…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  4. Mellon Bank (East) Psfs, National Association v. Kenneth v. Farino Leslie Trinin Robert Levitas Eileen MichaelsCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
  5. Imo Industries, Inc. v. Kiekert AgCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1998

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Urgent v. Technical Assistance Bureau, Inc.District Court, Virgin Islands · 2003
  2. Bragg v. Linden Research, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2007
  3. THAR PROCESS, INC. v. SOUND WELLNESS, LLCDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2021
  4. Thar Process, Inc. v. Sound Wellness, LLCDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2021

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API