Legal Opinion
Mattel, Inc. v. Greiner & Hausser GmbH
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 22, 2003No. 02-56272PublishedCited by 73 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CLIFTON, Circuit Judge.
Barbie, the ubiquitous doll produced by Mattel, has been a regular visitor to our court.1 This time she brings with her an issue of personal jurisdiction — not over her, but over a German toy company which has questioned her ancestry by asserting that Barbie was a copy of its doll and that Mattel had infringed its patent and other intellectual property rights. The German company, Greiner & Hausser GmbH (“G&H”), previously asserted claims to that effect in a lawsuit filed in federal district court in Los Angeles in 1961, more than 40 years ago. That lawsuit was…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Thompson v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Bancroft & Masters, Inc., a California Corporation v. Augusta National Inc., a Georgia CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Harris Rutsky & Co. Insurance Services, Inc. v. Bell & Clements LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by73 opinions
- Dudnikov v. Chalk & Vermilion Fine Arts, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008
- Universal Leather, LLC v. KORO AR, S.A.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2014
- Rhoades v. Avon Products, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Campbell Pet Co. v. MialeCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
- Nucal Foods, Inc. v. Quality Egg LLCDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2012
68 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.