Legal Opinion

Washington Shoe Company v. A-Z Sporting Goods Inc

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided December 17, 2012No. 11-35166, 11-35206PublishedCited by 158 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BYBEE, Circuit Judge:

In this copyright infringement action, we address whether an Arkansas retailer is subject to personal jurisdiction in Washington when its only relevant contact with the state is a claim that it willfully violated a copyright held by a Washington corporation. The district court for the Western District of Washington dismissed Washington Shoe Company’s (‘Washington Shoe”) action against A-Z Sporting Goods, Inc. (“A-Z”) for lack of personal jurisdiction. We reverse.

I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Plaintiff-appellant Washington Shoe is a Washington corporation that has…

2Cases cited29 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. World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  4. Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  5. Calder v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984

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

3Cited by158 opinions

  1. Learjet, Inc. v. Oneok, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
  2. Bernard Picot v. Dean WestonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
  3. Axiom Foods, Inc. v. Acerchem International, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
  4. K. Morrill v. Scott Financial Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
  5. Freestream Aircraft (Bermuda) v. Aero Law GroupCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018

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

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

Powered by the Exa API